HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 10 March 1982 511 · hong kong legislative council―10 march 1982 515 Organization presently is located, as a matter of administrative convenience,

HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL―10 March 1982 511

OFFICIAL REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS

Wednesday, 10 March 1982

The Council met at half past two o’clock

PRESENT

HIS EXCELLENCY THE GOVERNOR (PRESIDENT)SIR CRAWFORD MURRAY MACLEHOSE, G.B.E., K.C.M.G., K.C.V.O.

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF SECRETARYSIR CHARLES PHILIP HADDON-CAVE, K.B.E., C.M.G., J.P.

THE HONOURABLE THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY (Acting)MR. HENRY CHING, C.B.E., J.P.

THE HONOURABLE THE ATTORNEY GENERALMR. JOHN CALVERT GRIFFITHS, Q.C.

THE HONOURABLE THE SECRETARY FOR HOME AFFAIRSMR. DENIS CAMPBELL BRAY, C.M.G., C.V.O., J.P.

THE HONOURABLE DAVID AKERS-JONES, C.M.G., J.P.SECRETARY FOR CITY AND NEW TERRITORIES ADMINISTRATION

THE HONOURABLE LEWIS MERVYN DAVIES, C.M.G., O.B.E., J.P.SECRETARY FOR SECURITY

THE HONOURABLE DAVID WYLIE MCDONALD, C.M.G. J.P.SECRETARY FOR LANDS AND WORKS

THE HONOURABLE KENNETH WALLIS JOSEPH TOPLEY, C.M.G., J.P.SECRETARY FOR EDUCATION

THE HONOURABLE ALAN JAMES SCOTT, C.B.E., J.P.SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT

DR. THE HONOURABLE THONG KAH-LEONG, C.B.E., J.P.DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL AND HEALTH SERVICES

THE HONOURABLE ERIC PETER HO, C.B.E., J.P.SECRETARY FOR SOCIAL SERVICES

THE HONOURABLE JOHN MARTIN ROWLANDS, C.B.E., J.P.SECRETARY FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE

THE HONOURABLE JAMES NEIL HENDERSON, J.P.COMMISSIONER FOR LABOUR

THE HONOURABLE GERALD PAUL NAZARETH, O.B.E., Q.C.LAW DRAFTSMAN

THE HONOURABLE WILLIAM DORWARD, O.B.E., J.P.DIRECTOR OF TRADE, INDUSTRY AND CUSTOMS

THE HONOURABLE JOHN MORRISON RIDDELL-SWAN, O.B.E., J.P.DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES

THE HONOURABLE DONALD LIAO POON-HUAI, O.B.E., J.P.SECRETARY FOR HOUSING

THE HONOURABLE GRAHAM BARNES, J.P.REGIONAL SECRETARY (HONG KONG AND KOWLOON), CITY AND NEW TERRITORIES

ADMINISTRATION

HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL―10 March 1982512

THE HONOURABLE SELWYN EUGENE ALLEYNE, J.P.DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARETHE HONOURABLE IAN FRANCIS CLUNY MACPHERSON, J.P.REGIONAL SECRETARY (NEW TERRITORIES), CITY AND NEW TERRITORIES

ADMINISTRATIONTHE HONOURABLE MICHAEL LEUNG MAN-KIN, J.P.DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION (Acting)THE HONOURABLE ROGERIO HYNDMAN LOBO, C.B.E., J.P.DR. THE HONOURABLE HARRY FANG SIN-YANG, C.B.E., J.P.THE HONOURABLE LO TAK-SHING, C.B.E., J.P.THE HONOURABLE FRANCIS YUAN-HAO TIEN, O.B.E., J.P.THE HONOURABLE ALEX WU SHU-CHIH, O.B.E., J.P.THE REVD. THE HONOURABLE JOYCE MARY BENNETT, O.B.E., J.P.THE HONOURABLE CHEN SHOU-LUM, O.B.E., J.P.THE HONOURABLE LYDIA DUNN, O.B.E., J.P.THE HONOURABLE PETER C. WONG, O.B.E., J.P.THE HONOURABLE WONG LAM, O.B.E., J.P.DR. THE HONOURABLE RAYSON LISUNG HUANG, C.B.E., J.P.THE HONOURABLE CHARLES YEUNG SIU-CHO, O.B.E., J.P.DR. THE HONOURABLE HO KAM-FAI, O.B.E., J.P.THE HONOURABLE ALLEN LEE PENG-FEI, J.P.THE HONOURABLE ANDREW SO KOWK-WING, J.P.THE HONOURABLE HU FA-KUANG, J.P.THE HONOURABLE WONG PO-YAN, O.B.E., J.P.THE HONOURABLE WILLIAM CHARLES LANGDON BROWN, J.P.THE HONOURABLE CHAN KAM-CHUEN, J.P.THE HONOURABLE STEPHEN CHEONG KAM-CHUEN, J.P.THE HONOURABLE CHEUNG YAN-LUNG, M.B.E., J.P.THE HONOURABLE MRS. SELINA CHOW LIANG SHUK-YEE, J.P.THE HONOURABLE MARIA TAM WAI-CHU

ABSENTTHE HONOURABLE DAVID GREGORY JEAFFRESON, C.B.E., J.P.SECRETARY FOR ECONOMIC SERVICESDR. THE HONOURABLE HENRY HU HUNG-LICK, O.B.E., J.P.THE REVD. THE HONOURABLE PATRICK TERENCE MCGOVERN, O.B.E., S.J., J.P.THE HONOURABLE DAVID KENNEDY NEWBIGGING, O.B.E., J.P.THE HONOURABLE JOHN JOSEPH SWAINE, O.B.E., Q.C., J.P.

IN ATTENDANCETHE CLERK TO THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCILMRS. JENNIE CHOK PANG YUEN-YEE


Papers

The following papers were laid pursuant to Standing Order 14(2):―

Subject L.N. No.

Subsidiary Legislation:

Public Revenue Protection Ordinance.Public Revenue Protection (Inland Revenue) Order 1982........................... 57

Water Pollution Control Ordinance.Water Pollution Control (Tolo Harbour and Channel Water Control Zone)Order 1982 .................................................................................................. 58

Boilers and Pressure Receivers Ordinance.Boilers and Pressure Receivers (Exemption) (Consolidation)(Amendment) (No. 2) Order 1981 ............................................................... 59



Evidence Ordinance.Evidence (Authorized Persons) (No. 2) Order 1982.................................... 62

Public Health and Urban Services Ordinance.Public Health and Urban Services (Public Markets) (Designation andAmendment of Tenth Schedule) Order 1982............................................... 63

Public Health and Urban Services Ordinance.Declaration of Markets in the New Territories ............................................ 64

Vocational Training Council Ordinance 1982.Vocational Training Council Ordinance 1982 (Commencement) Notice1982............................................................................................................. 65

Termination of Pregnancy (Amendment) Regulations 1982.Corrigendum................................................................................................ 66

Census and Statistics Ordinance.Census and Statistics (Annual Survey of Building, Construction and RealEstate Sectors) Order 1982.......................................................................... 67

Census and Statistics Ordinance.Census and Statistics (Quarterly Survey of Construction Output) Order1982............................................................................................................. 68


Census and Statistics Ordinance.Census and Statistics (Quarterly Survey of Employment, Vacancies andPayroll) Order 1982..................................................................................... 69

Census and Statistics Ordinance.Census and Statistics (Survey of Transport and Related Services for 1981)Order 1982 .................................................................................................. 70

Census and Statistics Ordinance.Census and Statistics (Survey of Imports and Exports of Services for1981) Order 1982 ........................................................................................ 71

Census and Statistics Ordinance.Census and Statistics (Survey of Banks, Deposit-Taking Companies andRepresentative Offices of Foreign Banks for 1981) Order 1982 ................. 72

Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance.Specification of Public Officers (No. 2) Order 1982................................... 73

Sessional Papers 1981-82:

No. 44―Television Advisory Board Hong Kong―8th Report

Oral answers to questions

Defederalization of the Public Works Department and establishment of the LandsDepartment

1. MISS DUNN asked:―Sir, what is the progress in implementing the defederalization ofthe Public Works Department and in establishing a new Lands Department and what willbe the working relationships among the new P.W.D. Departments themselves and betweenthese Departments and the Lands and Works Branch?

THE CHIEF SECRETARY:―Taking each of Miss DUNN’s three questions in turn, Sir, andbeginning with the defederalization of the Public Works Department as such: this will becompleted by I April next. From that date, five separate departments will come into being.These departments will be the Building Development Department; the EngineeringDevelopment Department (less the Traffic and Transport Branch of the Highways Officewhich is to be transferred to the Transport Department); the New Territories DevelopmentDepartment; the Water Supplies Department; and the new Lands Department. Later on thisyear, a new Electrical and Mechanical Services Department will be formed by hiving offthe Electrical and Mechanical Office from the Engineering Development Department; andultimately the Urban Area Development Organization will be hived off and converted intoanother separate department analogous to the New Territories Development Department.The Urban Area Development


Organization presently is located, as a matter of administrative convenience, within theLands and Works Branch of the Government Secretariat.

Turning now secondly to the setting up of the new Lands Department. Theestablishment of posts for the department will be made up of posts transferred from theexisting Lands, Survey and Town Planning Department, the City and New TerritoriesAdministration and the Lands and Works Branch. When the Lands and Works Branch wasset up on 1 September 1981 it took over the Lands Division of the old Environment Branchwhich handled some tasks of an executive nature. These are more properly theresponsibility of a department rather than a policy branch of the Government Secretariat. So,with effect from 1 April next, the Lands Division of the Lands and Works Branch will beconcerned with land policy questions only, including long term strategic planning. The onlynew post created so far for the new Lands Department is the post of Director of Lands, butFinance Committee’s authority for about a dozen additional posts at directorate level willbe sought in the near future. Later on, it is hoped that some existing professional andtechnical level posts can be deleted, for the establishment of the new Lands Department hasbeen developed from a zero base. Not surprisingly, therefore, some existing posts can bedispensed with which will represent an offset to the cost of the few additional posts to becreated.

Finally, as regards the working relationships envisaged between the several separatedepartments within the lands and works group: these will be similar to those developed overthe years between the departments of the federalized Public Works Department. However,in future, the co-ordinating agency will be the Secretary for Lands and Works, workingthrough the Lands and Works Branch of the Government Secretariat, rather than theDirector of Public Works, working through Public Works Department Headquarters. Theexisting network of inter-departmental administrative committees will have to be somewhatrestructured to reflect the new arrangements and this will be completed as soon as possible.

I should perhaps add, Sir, for the record that, although the Lands and Works Branch,will function as an ordinary policy branch within the Government Secretariat, it will alsohave to perform certain residual functions previously undertaken by Public WorksDepartment Headquarters, such as the formulation and review of technical standards,professional and technical training, the assessment and grading of contractors, publicrelations and the monitoring of progress on the Public Works Programme as a whole.

MISS DUNN:―How is the Lands Department to be organized on the ground?

THE CHIEF SECRETARY:―Well, Sir, at district level the new Lands Department will havethe advantage of having been planned from the outset on the basis of the DistrictAdministration Scheme, whereas the remainder of the Works


Departments are having to reorganize themselves taking into account that Scheme. Briefly,the Department will be organized on a district basis with the work being undertaken byteams responsible respectively for the disposal, management and acquisition of land withintheir districts. Each district will be headed by a District Land Officer who will be able tocall upon the services of District Land Surveyors and solicitors from the RegistrarGeneral’s Department stationed in the district. District Boards and District ManagementCommittees will have on them representatives from the Lands Department as well as fromthe New Territories Development or the Urban Area Development Organizationrespectively, who will be responsible both for action planning for the district and for liaisonwith the Works Departments.

MISS DUNN:―Sir, is it expected that the new defederalized departments will be able torespond more speedily to private sector developments?

THE CHIEF SECRETARY:―That’s a very clever question, Sir, because it implies we haven’tresponded to private sector needs in the past with the speed that Miss DUNN would wish.However, I would hope that in the future our response would be no less satisfactory(laughter).

N.T. District Board elections

2. MR. SO asked in Cantonese:―

政府對於㆔月㆕日新界區議會選舉的公眾反應，是否感到滿意？稍後可否將所

得經向本局提交報告，以便九月舉行的市民區選舉借鏡？

(The following is the interpretation of what Mr. So asked.)

Is Government satisfied with the public response to the N.T. District Board elections heldon 4 March and may a report be made to this Council in due course of experience gainedfrom the exercise which may be relevant to the Urban Area elections scheduled forSeptember?

SECRETARY FOR CITY AND NEW TERRITORIES ADMINISTRATION:―Sir, approximately 97000 people, representing over 51% of the registered voters in the N.T., voted in the NewTerritories District Board elections on 4 March. This response was highly satisfactory andis a clear demonstration of the keen public interest there is in participating in districtadministration and management.

Sir, I do not believe a separate report need be made to this Council as to how we applythe experience gained in the New Territories during the Urban Area elections since after allthe first stage of preparing for these elections begins next week with the registration ofvoters from 19 March to 30 April. In general all the formal procedures worked remarkablywell and the results indicate that by and large the Government and public effort in ensuringthat the elections were


successful was correctly pitched. Indeed, I should like to place on record my thanks to allthose who helped achieve this. With regard to detail, I will of course look at our proceduresto see if any changes are necessary and will arrange to brief the Unofficial Members of thisCouncil separately if so wished.

Registration of medical practitioners in Hong Kong

3. MR. LO asked:―Why are doctors qualified to practise in highly developed countrieslike the U.S.A. prohibited by law from practising here in Hong Kong; and, what are theeffects of this prohibition medically and economically?

DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL AND HEALTH SERVICES:―Sir, to do full justice to Mr. LO’s question,I shall first have to clarify the present provisions of the Medical Registration Ordinance inregard to the registration of medical practitioners in Hong Kong.

At present there are three categories of medical practitioners who are entitled to beplaced on the register, viz:(a) any person who holds a Colony diploma, i.e., the degree of Bachelor of Medicine and

Bachelor of Surgery (M.B.B.S.) of the Hong Kong University;(b) any person who holds a qualification or degree recognized by the General Medical

Council (G.M.C.) of the United Kingdom; and(c) any licentiate of the Medical Council of Hong Kong.

It will be seen that the intention of the law is that any person who is to be placed on thelocal medical practitioners register must be one who has undergone assessment in regard tohis training and experience which is inherent in the qualifications of the three categories ofmedical practitioners that I have just mentioned. I might add that such assessment,particularly as in the cases of categories (b) and (c), is a normal and basis requirement byall medical registration authorities in other countries to ensure a reasonable standard oftraining and practice for medical practitioners in the interests of their own communities.

It follows that any person, besides category (a), i.e. holders of the M.B.B.S. (H.K.)degree, irrespective of where he is medically qualified, could also be place on the registerlocally if he could satisfy any one of the two other authorities, viz., the G.M.C. of U.K. orthe Licentiate Committee of the Hong Kong Medical Council. Therefore, there is noprohibition in the present law for a doctor who is qualified in other countries, including theU.S.A. and other developed countries to practise locally, provided that he is also qualified,willing and able to go through the assessment systems inherent in categories (b) and (c).Thus, over the past 40 years or so, among the medical practitioners in Hong Kong, are 174holders of U.S. and Canadian qualifications who have been placed on the local medicalregister by virtue of their G.M.C. registrations.


On the other hand, it also follows that the Medical Council at the moment has nodiscretion to consider and place on the register, straightaway, holders of diplomas (or whatis commonly known as foreign diplomas) other than the three categories mentioned.

Thus, in regard to the second part of Mr. LO’s question, bearing in mind that there hasbeen no prohibition of diploma holders from the U.S.A. and other developed countries, it isdifficult to assess accurately the medical and economical effects of our present provisions.Perhaps some idea may be gleaned from the fact that there have only been nine enquiriesmade to the Medical Council by holders of U.S. or Canadian qualifications who aredesirous of residing and practising in Hong Kong since the beginning of last year. Theeffects of this number of persons in the overall context of Hong Kong, assuming that all arefit to be placed straightaway on the local register, do not appear great.

However, Mr. LO may be glad to hear that proposals for amending the MedicalRegistration Ordinance which, inter alia, include a provision to allow the Medical Councilof Hong Kong the discretion to consider and assess directly qualified foreign diplomaholders, are in an advanced stage of preparation, and these proposals are likely to besubmitted to Your Excellency in Council for consideration shortly.

MR. LO:―Sir, as regards the penultimate paragraph of Dr. Thong’s answer, does theGovernment agree that the number of enquiries received is merely a guide to the number ofdoctors ignorant of our arrangements here, and not to the number who would like topractise here under different arrangements?

DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL AND HEALTH SERVICES:―Sir, it is difficult to say exactly how manydoctors holding foreign diplomas are qualified or fit to practise locally without assessment,and if so whether they are desirous of coming to Hong Kong and practising locally. So adirect answer to Mr. LO’s question is that there is no accurate assessment that I could giveto him.

MR. LO:―Going down the line to the final paragraph of Dr. Thong’s answer, will theGovernment ensure that in the exercise of the discretion referred to there, the views and theinterests of the wider public as opposed to the views and the interests of the medicalprofession will not be forgotten?

DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL AND HEALTH SERVICES:―Sir, Government will certainly take intoconsideration Mr. LO’s point and will try its very best to see that in the exercise of thepower of discretion, if approved, that fairness to all interested parties and especially thepublic interest is catered for.

MR. LO:―Will the Government accept my gratitude?

DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL AND HEALTH SERVICES:―Yes, Sir (laughter).


REVD. JOYCE M. BENNETT:―Sir, what stimulus is given to Australian doctors to practise inHong Kong as I understand there is an over-supply of doctors there?

DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL AND HEALTH SERVICES:―Could Miss BENNETT please repeat thequestion?

REVD. JOYCE M. BENNETT:―What stimulus is given to Australian doctors to practise inHong Kong as I understand there is an over-supply of doctors in Australia?

DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL AND HEALTH SERVICES:―Sir, the natural stimulus is that HongKong is a very dynamic society and that most doctors would like to come here and practise.

Principal and Senior Assistant Master ranks for primary schools

4. REVD. JOYCE M. BENNETT asked:―Following the implementation of the relevantrecommendation of the White Paper on Primary Education and Pre-Primary Services inGovernment primary schools,(a) when will the Principal Assistant Master rank be created for heads of aided primary

schools with 24 classes or more; and(b) when will the Senior Assistant Master rank be available for heads of aided primary

schools with 17-23 classes?

DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION:―Sir, the provision of Principal Assistant Master and SeniorAssistant Master posts for heads of aided primary schools will be implemented as soon asthe financial commitment has been approved by Finance Committee. I understand that thisproposal will be put to Finance Committee at its next regular meeting.

REVD. JOYCE M. BENNETT:―Sir, when did Government teachers gain these improvedconditions?

DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION:―Sir, the relevant ranks in the Government sector were createdon 11 February 1981.

REVD. JOYCE M. BENNETT:―Sir, why then has it taken so long for the proposals to reachFinance Committee for the aided schools?

DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION:―Sir, the creation of the ranks and the posts in the aided sectorinvolves a revised system of allowances to heads of aided primary schools. Theseallowances are to take into account the responsibility of the heads concerned for thoseheads who are not yet qualified for promotion. These allowances were revised last year andpromotion proposal was made to the


Secretariat as early as April 1981. However, there have been discussions and debates on therevised allowances since then. It was only until recently that we agreed the allowancesproposed.

REVD. JOYCE M. BENNETT:―Sir, why did these discussions not take place when the WhitePaper on Primary Education and Pre-primary Services was taking place?

DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION:―Sir, the reason is because we cannot pre-empt FinanceCommittee’s approval and decision on the new ranks for the Government sector. Theseranks were approved in February last year. It was only after that was approved that we canstart revising the allowances for the aided sector.

Customer Relations Unit in Queen Elizabeth Hospital

5. DR. HO asked:―Will Government make a statement on the success or otherwise of the6-month pilot Customer Relations Unit project in Queen Elizabeth Hospital?

DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL AND HEALTH SERVICES:―Sir, the Customer Relations Projectcommenced operations in Queen Elizabeth Hospital on 1 June 1981.

The project was started with the primary aim of rendering assistance to patients andtheir relatives to obtain available services in the hospital promptly and to explain hospitalprocedures and other activities within a hospital to them so as to avoid unnecessarymisunderstanding and disputes. Also, it should relieve professionals staff from involvingthemselves in non-professional matters.

In the first six months of its operation, it is clear that, by and large, the basis objectiveshave been attained.

The patients and their relatives, in particular, have benefited much from the directcontact with someone who could give clear explanations about hospital procedures andservice on the spot which at times appear to them to be cumbersome and complicated andhave also saved unnecessary concern about the conditions of patients and their treatment.

In regard to the benefit to the staff, the scheme has reduced substantially the timeformerly spent by professional staff on patient relation matters, thus allowing them toconcentrate on patient care.

The Unit has also effectively dealt with education and publicity on hospital proceduresand its activities.

During the period under review, it dealt with 79 complaints and 3 120 enquiries. Theproject and its structure are now being appraised in detail with a view to arriving at adecision on the long term future of its role.


DR. HO:―Sir, the project is apparently a successful one according to the reply. Can theDirector of Medical and Health Services tell this Council some of the key recommendationsof the review?

DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL AND HEALTH SERVICES:―Sir, the Departmental report in fact hasjust been completed and is now being studied both within the Department and by otherrelevant departments and policy branches. At this point in time I am unable to tell Dr. Hoabout the details but certainly when the details have been assessed and the project founduseful and acceptable to Government, this will be extended to other hospitals.

Junior Secondary Education Assessment System

6. MR. SO asked in Cantonese:―

初㆗成績評核辦法自法年九月實施以來，政府曾否作出評估？若然，可否向本

局提交評估報告？

(The following is the interpretation of what Mr. SO asked.)

Has Government made any assessment of the Junior Secondary Education Assessmentsystem since its inception in September last year and, if so, may a report be made to thisCouncil?

DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION:―Sir, the Education Department has made an assessment of thefirst Junior Secondary Education Assessment. As Members are aware, the present systemwas introduced in 1980-81, after lengthy consultation and public debate, as a replacementfor the original proposal which was for a public examination. The main objective of theJ.S.E.A. system is to select a proportion of the Form III pupils in the fairest possible wayand to allocate them to the available aided Form IV places with the least disruption andinconvenience possible.

The findings of this first assessment indicate that this main objective has beenachieved. For the 1981 J.S.E.A., a total of 92980 entries were received from Form III pupils.Of these, 52 521 pupils were allocated aided Form IV places, while 1 052 were given placesin full-time craft courses in the Technical Institutes. The former group represented 58.6% ofthe net entries after withdrawals and the successful Technical Institute applicants wereexcluded. Of the pupils allocated Form IV places, 80% were allocated places within theirown schools. The full report on the 1981 J.S.E.A. is now being printed and will be issued toall participating schools next month. Copies of this report will of course be available to anyMember of this Council who wishes to have one.

REVD. JOYCE M. BENNETT:―Sir, with reference to the fourth line of the second paragraphof this answer, could the word ‘aided’ be defined? Does it mean the aided sector or thepublic sector?


DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION:―Sir, the aided places in this context include both the publicsector which includes the aided places, as well as include the private bought places scheme.

MRS. CHOW:―Sir, is Government satisfied that the system is not creating unnecessarypressure on Form III pupils which could otherwise be avoided with internal assessment andpersuasion within schools?

DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION:―Sir, the effects of the first assessment are being analysed verycarefully. The amount of pressure on students is certainly a factor which we will take fullyinto account. However, I think many parents and schools do not understand that the J.S.E.A.is not an examination; it is only a scaling test and the results are based on the internalassessment of schools themselves. Therefore, I think we feel that if publicity is given moreto this assessment the need for such fears will have been reduced. Nevertheless we areanalysing the results very carefully in the context of this report.

REVD. JOYCE M. BENNETT:―Sir, can you explain why there are now empty seats in FormIV in some Government and aided schools?

DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION:―Sir, I am not aware of the number of empty places inGovernment aided schools. There might be cases where a class is not full but the statisticshave yet to be provided.

REVD. JOYCE M. BENNETT:―Sir, since 80% of these students were allocated back to theirown schools, is it not possible to allow those schools to continue the previous policy ofpromoting their own students and taking into Form IV enough students to fill their places?

DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION:―Sir, I think the allocation system takes fully into account theneeds of the students concerned to provide for education beyond Form III within their ownschools. However, one of the main criteria for allocating students for Form IV places is totake into account the parents’ own choice, so in this case the parents’ choice does matter alot to the allocation of students in the selection process.

Statement

Census and Statistics Ordinance

Census and Statistics (Survey of Transport and Related Services for 1981) Order 1982

Census and Statistics (Survey of Imports and Exports of Services for 1981) Order 1982


Census and Statistics (Survey of Banks, Deposit-Taking Companies andRepresentatives Offices of Foreign Banks for 1981) Order 1982

Census and Statistics (Annual Survey of Building, Construction and Real EstateSectors) Order 1982

Census and Statistics (Quarterly Survey of Construction Output) Order 1982

Census and Statistics (Quarterly Survey of Employment, Vacancies and Payroll)Order 1982

THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY:―

IntroductionSir, an undertaking has been given to make a statement each year when Orders forstatistical surveys are laid on the table of this Council.

On the advice of the Statistics Advisory Board, the Commissioner for Census andStatistics has sought for 1982 six Orders under the Census and Statistics Ordinance. All thesurveys covered by these Orders form part of the long term programme of economicsurveys to provide information on the structural characteristics of the main sectors of theeconomy and to enable the Government to monitor their performance over time.

In implementing this programme, the Commissioner usually seeks specific Orders foreach survey on an annual basis until he is satisfied that he has got the details of the surveyright. He then seeks Orders to establish the survey on a permanent basis.

Specific Survey OrdersThis year, three of the Orders are specifically for data in respect of 1981 only.

The first is an Order for a benchmark survey of transport and related services,following an investigatory survey in 1981. This is the only major sector remaining to becovered by a benchmark survey. A sample of 10 000 establishments out of a total of 35 000will be covered.

The second is an Order covering the fourth annual survey of imports and exports ofservices to collect information essential for estimating the Gross Domestic Product. Thecoverage and content of the survey will be the same as that of last year, but a specific ratherthan a permanent Order is required because it may be necessary to introduce changes to thesurvey. About 1 750 establishments will be covered, and this should adequately representthe relevant business.

The third is an Order for the second round of the survey of banks, deposit-takingcompanies and representative offices of foreign banks. This survey also involves data thatis used in estimating the Gross Domestic Product. Once the


results are available the Commissioner will assess the importance of the different items ofdata collected and design a permanent survey. All establishments, currently about 600, willbe enumerated.

Permanent Survey OrdersThe remaining three Orders are to establish permanent surveys that have so far beenconducted on a specific basis.

Two of them are required for annual surveys of the building, construction and realestate sectors and quarterly surveys of construction output. Now that the first benchmarksurvey of the building, construction and real estate sectors has been completed, theCommissioner can undertake simplified, annual follow-up surveys. The quarterly surveysare to monitor short-term fluctuations in construction activity, using a simple questionnaire.The data will provide the basis for estimating a quarterly index of construction output. Forthe 1982 annual survey, the Commissioner will cover a sample of about 7 500 contractorsand property developers. For the quarterly surveys he will use a sample of about 2 000contractors. He will distinguish between building and civil engineering projects.

The third permanent Order covers the quarterly surveys of employment and vacancieswhich have been conducted now for many years. Recently the surveys were extended toinclude payroll data. The Commissioner now considers the new coverage and content of thesurveys are satisfactory, hence his request for a permanent Order. The number ofestablishments to be enumerated will vary from quarter to quarter, ranging between about120 000 in the second quarter and 70 000 in the fourth.

Government business

Motions

INTERPRETATION AND GENERAL CLAUSES ORDINANCE

THE CHIEF SECRETARY moved the following motion:―That on 1 April 1982―1. (a) The functions exercisable by the Director of Public Works by virtue of the

provisions specified in the second column of the First Schedule of the Ordinancesspecified in the first column of that Schedule be transferred to the public officerrespectively specified in relation thereto in the third column of that schedule.

(b) The Ordinances specified in the first column of the First Schedule be amended, inthe provisions thereof specified in the second column of that Schedule, bydeleting ‘Director of Public Works’ wherever occurring and substituting the titlespecified in relation thereto in the third column of that Schedule.


(c) The Ordinances specified in the first column of the Second Schedule be amended,in the provisions thereof specified in the second column of that Schedule, bydeleting ‘Public Works Department’ wherever occurring and substituting theexpression specified in relation thereto in the third column of that Schedule.

(d) The Ordinances specified in the first column of the Third Schedule be amended,in the provisions thereof specified in the second column of that Schedule, bydeleting ‘Director’ wherever occurring and substituting the title specified inrelation thereto in the third column of that Schedule.

2. (a) The functions exercisable by the Secretary for City and New TerritoriesAdministration by virtue of the provisions specified in the second column of theFourth Schedule of the Ordinances specified in the first column of that Schedulebe transferred to the Director of Lands.

(b) The Ordinances specified in the first column of the Fourth Schedule be amended,in the provisions thereof specified in the second column of that Schedule, bydeleting ‘Secretary for City and New Territories Administration’ whereveroccurring and substituting the following―

‘Director of Lands’.

3. (a) The functions exercisable by the Secretary for Lands and Works by virtue of theprovisions specified in the second column of the Fifth Schedule of the Ordinancespecified in the first column of that Schedule be transferred to the Director ofLands.

(b) The Ordinance specified in the first column of the Fifth Schedule be amended, inthe provisions thereof specified in the second column of that Schedule, bydeleting ‘Secretary for Lands and Works’ wherever occurring and substituting thefollowing―

‘Director of Lands’.

4. The functions exercisable by the Director of Lands, Survey and Town Planning byvirtue of any Ordinance be transferred to the Director of Lands.

5. (a) The functions exercisable by the Secretary for City and New TerritoriesAdministration by virtue of the provisions specified in the second column of theSixth Schedule of the Ordinance specified in the first column of that Schedule betransferred to the Registrar General in his capacity as Land Officer.

(b) The Ordinance specified in the first column of the Sixth Schedule be amended, inthe provisions thereof specified in the second column of that Schedule, bydeleting ‘Secretary for City and New Territories Administration’ and substitutingthe following―

‘Land Officer’.


6. (a) The functions exercisable by a District Officer by virtue of the provisionsspecified in the second column of the Seventh Schedule of the Ordinancespecified in the first column of that Schedule be transferred to the Director ofLands.

(b) Rule 2 of the Duplicate Permits and Licences (New Territories) Rules, (Chapter97, subsidiary legislation) be amended―

(i) by inserting after ‘any District Officer’ where it first appears the following―‘or the Director of Lands’; and

(ii) by deleting ‘any District Officer’, where it appears for the second time, andsubstituting the following―

‘the Director of Lands’.

7. (a) The functions exercisable by a District Officer by virtue of the provisionsspecified in the second column of the Eighth Schedule of the Ordinance specifiedin the first column of that Schedule be transferred to the Registrar General in hiscapacity as Land Officer.

(b) The Land Registration (New Territories) Fees Regulations, (Chapter 128,subsidiary legislation) be amended―(i) in regulation 3 by deleting ‘A District Officer’ and substituting the following

―‘The Land Officer’; and

(ii) in items 3, 4 and 5 of the Schedule by deleting ‘the District Officer’wherever appearing and substituting in each case the following―

‘the Land Officer’.

8. (a) The functions exercisable by the Secretary for City and New TerritoriesAdministration under the Emergency (Requisition) Regulations (Chapter 241,subsidiary legislation) be transferred to the Secretary for Lands and Works.

(b) The Schedule to the Emergency (Requisition) Regulations (Chapter 241,subsidiary legislation) be amended by deleting ‘Secretary for City and NewTerritories Administration’ and substituting the following―

‘Secretary for Lands and Works’.

9. References herein to an Ordinance be construed as including references to anysubsidiary legislation made under that Ordinance.

10. Any Crown lease or other instrument or contract affecting or relating to any land in theNew Territories be construed, as respects any function exercisable in respect thereofby the Secretary for City and New Territories Administration, and have effect as from1 April 1982 as if for any reference therein to the Secretary for City and NewTerritories Administration there were substituted a reference to the Director of Lands.


FIRST SCHEDULE [para. 1(a)]

Enactment Provision Public Officer/title to besubstituted

Evidence Ordinance(Chapter 8)

Section 28(1)(b)(i) Director of EngineeringDevelopment

Land Tribunal Rules(Chapter 17,

Rule 41(2) and (3) Director of BuildingDevelopment

subsidiary legislation) Rules 44(1)(b) and 45(1)(b)Schedule―5

Director of Lands

Form5 Director of EngineeringDevelopment

Form 7 Director of BuildingDevelopment

Form 8 Director of BuildingDevelopment

Form 9 Director of LandsForm 10 Director of LandsForm 11 Director of Building

Development

Crown Land Ordinance(Chapter 28)

Schedule (except inreference to section8(2) and (3)regarding theNew Territories,except NewKowloon)

Director of Lands

Schedule (inreference to section8(2) and (3)regarding the NewTerritories, exceptNew Kowloon)

Director of EngineeringDevelopment

Crown Leases Ordinance(Chapter 40)

Section 2 Director of Lands

Port Control (CargoWorking Areas)Ordinance(Chapter 81)

Section 3(2) Director of Lands

Waterworks Ordinance(Chapter 102)

Section 2 Director of Water Supplies



Electricity SupplyRegulations (Chapter103, subsidiarylegislation)

Regulations 2(c),7, 8, 12, 13(1),13(8), 13(9),13(14)(I)(b),13(14)(II)(a)(iii),13(14)(II)(b)(ii),13(16), 13(18)(a)(iii),13(18)(b)(iii), 21,24, 32(1), 38 and39(16).


Regulation13(13)


Ferries Regulations(Chapter 104,subsidiary legislation)

Regulation 52(1) Director of EngineeringDevelopment

Excluded Ferries (MaOn Shan and Ma LiuShui) Regulations(Chapter 104, subsidiarylegislation)

Regulation 2(b) Director of EngineeringDevelopment

Excluded Ferries(Passenger Ferry ServiceAcross Tsau Wan)

Regulation 2(b)and (e)


Regulations (Chapter104, subsidiarylegislation)

Excluded Ferries(Passenger Ferry Servicebetween Hong KongCentral District andMei Foo Sun Chuen)




Excluded Ferries(Hong Kong – TsuenWan - Tsing Yi)






Public LightingOrdinance (Chapter 105)

Sections 2 and 3 Director of EngineeringDevelopment

TelecommunicationOrdinance (Chapter 106)

Sections 14(1)(a) and14(3)(b)

Director of Lands

Tramway Ordinance(Chapter 107)

Section 2 Director of EngineeringDevelopment


Public Reclamationsand Works Ordinance(Chapter 113)

Sections 2(2)(b), 3(1)(a) and3(3)(a)

Director of Lands

Crown Lease (Pok FuLam) Ordinance(Chapter 118)


Buildings Ordinance(Chapter 123)

Sections 2(1), 2(2),18(1)(ii), 18(3), SecondSchedule.

Director of BuildingDevelopment

Crown Rentand Premium(Apportionment)Ordinance (Chapter 125)

Sections 10(2), 14A(2) and23(4)(a)

Director of Lands

Foreshores and SeaBed Ordinance(Chapter 127)

Sections 4(2)(b), 5(1), 6,7(1), 7(2) and 7(3)(a)

Director of Lands

Streets (Alteration)Ordinance (Chapter 130)

Section 2 and Schedule Secretary for Lands andWorks

Town PlanningRegulations (Chapter131, subsidiarylegislation)

Regulations 2(1) and 2(2) Director of Lands

Public Health andUrban Services

Section 27(6)(b) Director of BuildingDevelopment

Ordinance (Chapter 132) Sections 105A(3)and 105M(3)Section 111A

Director of Lands



Enactment ProvisionPublic Officer/title to besubstituted

Third Schedule in relation toUrban Areas and other thanunder sections 106 (3) and(4), 114(1) and (2)


Third Schedule in relation toUrban Areas and undersections 106(3) and (4),114(1) and (2)

Director of Lands

Third Schedule in relation tothe New Territories(excluding New Kowloon)


Sixth Schedule Director of EngineeringDevelopment

Advertisement By-laws(Chapter 132, subsidiarylegislation)

By-law 1(1) Director of Lands

Public Market By-laws(Chapter 132, subsidiarylegislation)

By-laws 7(2)(a) and (b), 7(3) Director of BuildingDevelopment

Public Market (NewTerritories) Regulations(Chapter 132, subsidiarylegislation)

Regulations 7(2)(a) and (b),7(3)


Slaughter-houses (NewTerritories) Regulations(Chapter 132, subsidiarylegislation)

Regulation 22(d) Director of BuildingDevelopment

Sand Ordinance (Chapter147)

Sections 2(1) and (2), 3(1)and (4)


Places of PublicEntertainment Ordinance(Chapter 172)

Section 2 Director of BuildingDevelopment



Air Armament PracticeOrdinance (Chapter 194)

Second Schedule Secretary for Lands andWorks Director of Lands

Defences (Firing Areas)Ordinance (Chapter 196)

Second Schedule Secretary for Lands andWorks Director of Lands

Cross-Harbour TunnelOrdinance (Chapter 203)


Country Parks Ordinance(Chapter 208)

Section 16(7)(b) Director of Lands

Aerial Ropeways (Safety)Ordinance (Chapter 211)


Metrication Amendments(Places of PublicEntertainment Regulations)Order (Chapter 214,subsidiary legislation)

paragraph 6 Director of BuildingDevelopment

Road Traffic Ordinance(Chapter 220)

Section 7A(1), (2) and (3) Director of EngineeringDevelopment

Road Traffic (Lighting andGuarding of Road Works)Regulations (Chapter 220,subsidiary legislation)

Regulation 2 Director of EngineeringDevelopment

Road Traffic (Road Crossing)Regulations (Chapter 220,subsidiary legislation)


Summary OffencesOrdinance (Chapter 228)

Sections 13(6)(a), 13A(a),37(c), 38(1) and (2)


Summary Offences(Permitted Work)Regulations (Chapter 228,subsidiary legislation)




Emergency (Requisition)Regulations (Chapter 241,subsidiary legislation)

Schedule Secretary for Lands andWorks

Child Care Centres Ordinance(Chapter 243)

Section 7(1)(b) Director of BuildingDevelopment

Child Care CentresRegulations (Chapter 243,subsidiary legislation)

Regulations 23(1)(b), 23(2)and 24(2)(b)


Oil Pollution (Land Use andRequisition) Ordinance(Chapter 247)


Peak Tramway Ordinance(Chapter 265)


Peak Tramway Rules(Chapter 265, subsidiarylegislation)

Rule 22 Director of EngineeringDevelopment

Hong Kong and YaumatiFerry Company (Services)Ordinance (Chapter 266)

Section 4A and Schedule(paragraphs 3(a), 15 and 16)


Telephone Ordinance(Chapter 269)



‘Star’ Ferry Company(Services) Ordinance(Chapter 274)

Section 4A and Schedule(paragraphs 2(1), 11 and12(1))


Mass Transit Railway (LandResumption and RelatedProvisions) Ordinance(Chapter 276)

Sections 2, 3(1), (2), (3) and(4), 10(2), 29(1), (2) and (3)


Education Ordinance(Chapter 279)

Sections 12(3) and 12(5)(c) Director of BuildingDevelopment



Education Regulations(Chapter 279, subsidiarylegislation)

Regulation 14 Director of BuildingDevelopment

Housing Ordinance (Chapter283)

Sections 25A(1) and30(1)(gc)


Housing (Traffic) By-laws(Chapter 283, subsidiarylegislation)

By-laws 3, 4, 5(4) and 6(1) Director of EngineeringDevelopment

Mining Ordinance (Chapter285)

Section 9(a) and (c) Director of Lands

Hong Kong Airport (Controlof Obstructions) Ordinance(Chapter 301)

Sections 5, 7(1), 13, 14(1),15(1), (2)(c)(ii) and (8),16(1), (3), (6), (8) and (9), 17,18(2), 20(g), 23(1) and (2),24(a) and (f), 25(2)


Hong Kong Airport (Controlof Obstructions) (Lighting)(Consolidation) Order(Chapter 301, subsidiarylegislation)

Paragraph 2 Director of BuildingDevelopment

Buildings Ordinance(Application to the NewTerritories) Regulations(Chapter 322, subsidiarylegislation)

Regulation 2 Director of BuildingDevelopment

Lifts and Escalators (Safety)Ordinance (Chapter 327)

Section 2 and Schedule(Forms 1 to 21 inclusive)


Demolished Buildings (Re-development of Sites)Ordinance (Chapter 337)

Section 2(1) Director of BuildingDevelopment



Temporary Restriction ofBuilding Development (Mid-levels) Ordinance (Chapter351)

Section 2(1) and (2) Director of BuildingDevelopment

Waste Disposal Ordinance(Chapter 354)

Sections 2(1), 16(1), 17(1)and (2)(a), 18(2), 19(1),20(1), (2)(a), (3) and (4),33(1)(j) and 36(3)


Water Pollution ControlOrdinance (Chapter 358)

Sections 2(1) (in thedefinition of ‘Authority’),4(3), 6(2)


Chinese PermanentCemetaries Ordinance(Chapter 1112)

Section 3(2)(a)(ii) Director of BuildingDevelopment

Road Tunnels (Government)Ordinance 1981 (Ord. No. 48of 1981)


SECOND SCHEDULE [para. 1(c)]

Ordinance Provision

Expression to be substitutedfor ‘Public WorksDepartment’

Crown Lands Ordinance(Chapter 28)

Schedule Engineering DevelopmentDepartment

TelecommunicationOrdinance (Chapter 106)

Sections 14(1)(a) and14(3)(b)

Lands Department

Buildings Ordinance (Chapter123)

Sections 2(2), 18(1)(b)(ii) and18(3)

Building DevelopmentDepartment

Education Ordinance(Chapter 279)

Sections 12(3) and 12(5)(c) Building DevelopmentDepartment

Lifts and Escalators (Safety)Ordinance (Chapter 327)

Sections 36 and 43(2)Schedule (Forms 1-21inclusive)

Engineering DevelopmentDepartment


Ordinance Provision

Expression to be substitutedfor ‘Public WorksDepartment’

Demolished Buildings (Re-development of Sites)Ordinance (Chapter 337)

Section 2(2) Building DevelopmentDepartment

Temporary Restriction ofBuilding (Midlevels)Ordinance (Chapter 351)

Section 2(2) Building DevelopmentDepartment

Waste Disposal Ordinance(Chapter 354)

Section 16(2)(b) Engineering DevelopmentDepartment

THIRD SCHEDULE [para. 1(d)]

Ordinance Provision Title to be substituted for‘Director’

Tramway Ordinance (Chapter107)


Peak Tramway Ordinance(Chapter 265)


Peak Tramway Rules(Chapter 265, subsidiarylegislation)

Rule 22 Director of EngineeringDevelopment

Telephone Ordinance(Chapter 269)


FOURTH SCHEDULE [para. 2.](S.C.N.T.A. to D. of L.)

Enactment Provision

Landlord and Tenant (Consolidation) Section 50(2)(b)Ordinance (Chapter 7) Section 50(6)(l)(ii)

Crown Lands Ordinance (Chapter 28) Schedule

Buildings Ordinance (Chapter 123) Section 32

Crown Lands Resumption Ordinance(Chapter 124)

Section 2


Enactment Provision

Public Health and Urban Services Ordinance(Chapter 132)

Third Schedule, in relation to sections104(3), 105(1), 105(2)(b), 105(3), 105(4),106(3), 106(4), 114(1) and 114(2)

Sanitation and Conservancy (NewTerritories) Regulations (Chapter 132,subsidiary legislation)

Regulation 2(2)

Country Parks Ordinance Section 16(7)(a)(Chapter 208) Section 25(b)

Buildings Ordinance (Application to the NewTerritories) Regulations (Chapter 322,subsidiary legislation)

Regulation 2

FIFTH SCHEDULE [para. 3.]S.L.W. to D. of L.

Enactment Provision

Oil Pollution (Land Use and Requisition)Ordinance (Chapter 247)

Section 7(2) and (3)

SIXTH SCHEDULE [para. 5.]S.C.N.T.A. to R.G. as L.O.

Enactment Provision

New Territories Ordinance(Chapter 97)

Section 11(1) and (2)

SEVENTH SCHEDULE [para. 6.]

Enactment Provision

Duplicate Permits and Licences (NewTerritories) Rules (Chapter 97, subsidiarylegislation)

Rule 2

EIGHTH SCHEDULE [para. 7.]

Enactment Provision

Land Registration (New Territories) FeesRegulations (Chapter 128, subsidiarylegislation)

Regulation 3, Schedule (items 3, 4 and 5).


He said:―Sir, I rise to move the motion standing in my name in the Order Paper. Thismotion arises from the decisions to split up the Public Works Department into four separateand autonomous departments and to create a single Lands Department reponsible for landadministration throughout the whole of Hong Kong.

To enable the directors of these departments to assume their new roles with effect from1 April 1982 certain statutory powers need to be transferred to, and from, a number ofpublic officers as set out in the motion and in the attached schedules. The detailed planninginvolved in the establishment of a separate Electrical and Mechanical Services Departmentis unlikely to be completed before the middle of this year. So the statutory functions whichmust be transferred to the head of that department in due course will, meanwhile, beexercised by the Director of Engineering Development.

The motion also ensures, in paragraph 10, that the transfer to the Director of Lands ofthe land functions of the Secretary for City and New Territories Administration does notinvalidate any instruments or contracts relating to land in the New Territories issued orentered into by the Secretary for City and New Territories Administration.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question put and agreed to.

MASS TRANSIT RAILWAY CORPORATION ORDINANCE

THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY moved the following motion:―Under section 12(1) of theMass Transit Railway Corporation Ordinance that the schedule to the Resolution of theLegislative Council published as Legal Notice No. 242 of 1975 in the Gazette on 31October 1975 as amended from time to time be further amended by adding as item 39 thefollowing:

’39. Export credit to finance acontract placed in France

68 million Hong Kong Dollars and suchamounts as may become payable inconsequence of the operation of any pricevariation clause and such amounts as maybecome payable in respect of interest andother charges including deferred interestprovided that the liability of the Governmentin respect of deferred interest shall be limitedto 24 million Hong Kong Dollars’.

He said:―Sir, I move the first motion standing in my name on the Order Paper.


Section 12 of the Mass Transit Railway Corporation Ordinance requires the authorityof the Legislative Council for the Financial Secretary, on behalf of the Government, togrant guarantees in respect of the repayment of loans and other indebtedness incurred by theCorporation.

Authority is sought for a Government guarantee to cover repayment of a loan ofHK$68 million and such amount as may become payable in respect of interest and othercharges.

The sum borrowed under this guarantee will be used to finance the Island Line contractfor tunnels between Tai Koo Shing and Sai Wan Ho, including the Tai Koo Shing Station.

If Members approve this motion, the Government’s total guarantee commitment inrespect of outstanding loans available to the Mass Transit Railway Corporation will beHK$7,252 million. This contingent liability is provided for within our reserves.

Sir, I beg to move.


RATING ORDINANCE

THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY moved the following motion:―In exercise of the powersconferred by section 18(1) of the Rating Ordinance that, for the period 1 April 1982 to 31March 1983, for every tenement in a specified area set out in the first column of theSchedule, the general and Urban Council rates shall be computed on the basis of therespective percentage of the rateable value of such tenement set out opposite that area in thesecond and third columns of the Schedule.

SCHEDULE

Specified Area General Rates Urban Council Rates

D and D2 11% NilE 11% NilF1, F2, F3, F4, F5 F6 and F7 11% NilG1, G2, G3, G4 and G5 11% NilH1, H2, H3, H4 and H5 11% NilJ1, J2, J3 and J4 11% NilK1 and K2 11% NilL1, L2, L4 and L5 11% NilM1, M2, M3, M4 and M5 11% NilN1, N2, N3, N4 and N5 11% NilP 8% NilQ 8% NilR 8% NilS 8% Nil


He said:―Sir, I move the second motion standing in my name on the Order Paper.

In accordance with established policy, the full General Rate charge for each rating areain the New Territories is phased in over a period of five years. In the first year ofassessment the actual charge applied is 50% of the full charge, in the second year 60%, inthe third year 70%, and so on until the full charge is applied in the sixth year.

The full General Rate charge for the New Territories is 11%, and this already appliesto thirty-five out of the forty-four rating areas in the New Territories. Of the balance of ninerating areas, five will be in their sixth year of assessment in 1982-83, and the full charge of11% should be applied to them.

The remaining four areas will be in their third year of assessment, and the charge forthem should be 70% of the full charge, or 8%.

To give effect to these percentage charges a resolution is required under section 18(1)of the Rating Ordinance, and this is the sole object of this motion.

Sir, I beg to move.

MR. CHARLES YEUNG:―Sir, following the extensive development and urbanization of theNew Territories during the past decade, rates have been progressively introduced to newlydeveloped areas. The full General Rates charge for each newly assessed area is phased inover a period of five years.

Historically rates are a form of tax levied by local authorities for local purposes, uponthe occupants of immovable property, irrespective of the person’s general income andwhether or not the rate payer is in fact deriving profits or gain from such occupation. It wastherefore apposite that, with effect from the 1 April 1973, a proportion of the rates in theurban area should be allocated to the Urban Council to meet its local expenditure andgrowth without recourse to an annual grant from the General Revenue.

This financial autonomy has enabled the Urban Council to initiate and provide, amongother things, cultural, recreational and sports facilities and activities, and has allowed it anunfettered discretion to plan development programmes and to carry these out speedilyaccording to its own priorities.

Within the short space of eight years and under the firm guiding hand of the Council’sformer chairman, Mr. A. de O. SALES and through the dedication of the Council’s members,the quality of life in the urban area has improved by leaps and bounds. The inhabitants ofthe urban area are now able to enjoy spacious and well laid-out parks, swimming poolcomplexes of international standard, quality indoor stadia, Chinese and Symphonyorchestras as well as a Planetarium which is the source of world-wide admiration, and thisis just part of the Counil’s achievement.


I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate the Council on its success.

Since the formation of District Boards in the eight districts of the New Territories,funds have been allocated from General Revenue for local use to augment cultural andrecreational activities and to improve the local environment. Within these last few years wehave been able to witness a flush of cultural and environmental improvement activities, forexample a children’s choir in Sai Kung has been started as well as a ballet school in YuenLong and a dance group in Sheung Shui. The zeal and enthusiasm of the local people ininvolving themselves in the welfare of the community is very encouraging indeed.

With the planned programme for the formation of District Boards throughout HongKong and the New Territories, it is high time that Government gave serious thought to theallocation of a portion of the rates generated from the districts, for the use of DistrictBoards, in line with the procedure for Urban Council rates. The success achieved by theUrban Council in the disbursement of its rates will provide a good example for the DistrictBoards in using District Board Rates, if I may be allowed to propose the name.

Sir, with these remarks, I support the motion before the Council.


VOTE ON ACCOUNT

THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY moved the following motion:―That a sum not exceeding$20,133,978,000 shall be and is hereby charged upon the general revenue and funds ofHong Kong on account for or towards defraying the cost of the service of the yearcommencing on 1 April 1982 and ending on the 31 March 1983, and the sum so chargedmay be expended in the manner expressed in the schedule.

SCHEDULE

Head of Expenditure

Amount upon whichprovision on Account is

based

Amount of vote onAccount

$ $21 His Excellency the Governor’s

Establishment ...................................... 5,148,000 1,030,00022 Agriculture and Fisheries Department..... 147,556,000 58,374,00024 ...Audit Department .................................... 18,633,000 3,736,000


Head of Expenditure


basedAmount of vote on

Account$ $

25 Building Development Department ......... 392,694,000 79,119,00026 Census and Statistics Department............ 51,441,000 10,514,00028 Civil Aviation Department ...................... 126,579,000 52,710,00029 Correctional Services Department........... 302,355,000 68,851,00030 Defence: Auxiliary Medical Services ...... 6,949,000 1,390,00032 Defence: Civil Aid Services .................... 13,441,000 3,350,00034 Defence: Miscellaneous Measures .......... 1,894,449,000 842,595,00036 Defence: Royal Hong Kong Auxiliary

Air Force ............................................. 18,727,000 9,466,00038 Defence: Royal Hong Kong Regiment

(The Volunteers).................................. 14,319,000 4,284,00040 Education Department ............................. 495,876,000 106,046,00042 Education Subventions ............................ 2,802,878,000 760,104,00043 Engineering Development Department ... 850,004,000 184,050,00044 Environmental Protection Agency........... 13,449,000 4,670,00046 Fire Services Department ........................ 326,238,000 95,018,00047 Government Data Processing Agency ..... 60,189,000 20,757,00048 Government Laboratory .......................... 18,152,000 5,097,00050 Government Land Transport Agency ...... 13,213,000 4,254,00052 Government Secretariat ........................... 118,680,000 26,816,00053 Government Secretariat: City and New

Territories Administration ................... 163,470,000 43,707,00054 Government Secretariat: Civil Service

Branch ................................................. 829,515,000 165,903,00056 Government Secretariat: Lands and

Works Branch...................................... 31,118,000 6,595,00058 Government Supplies Department........... 65,480,000 23,766,00062 Housing Department................................ 204,557,000 55,595,00070 Immigration Department ......................... 216,649,000 72,699,00072 Independent Commission Against

Corruption ........................................... 100,693,000 21,192,00074 Information Services Department............ 33,972,000 6,840,00076 Inland Revenue Department .................... 161,080,000 34,270,00080 Judiciary .................................................. 104,651,000 22,694,00082 Kowloon-Canton Railway ....................... 142,338,000 32,782,00090 Labour Department.................................. 83,150,000 19,857,000


Head of Expenditure



Account$ $

91 Lands Department ................................... 210,424,000 50,106,00092 Legal Department .................................... 45,028,000 9,548,00094 Legal Aid Department ............................. 40,141,000 8,052,00096 London Office ......................................... 28,049,000 6,983,000100 Marine Department.................................. 160,514,000 55,256,000102 Medical and Health Department.............. 1,369,805,000 326,057,000104 Medical Subventions ............................... 775,832,000 282,690,000106 Miscellaneous Services ........................... 1,896,385,000 951,457,000110 New Territories Development

Department .......................................... 42,504,000 9,006,000112 Office of Unofficial Members of

Executive and Legislative Councils..... 7,058,000 1,412,000120 Pensions .................................................. 606,740,000 121,348,000122 Police: Royal Hong Kong Police Force... 1,682,480,000 479,628,000126 Post Office............................................... 403,404,000 106,945,000130 Printing Department ................................ 59,787,000 18,197,000134 Public Debt.............................................. 49,698,000 29,632,000136 Public Service Commission..................... 1,186,000 237,000160 Radio Television Hong Kong .................. 109,439,000 47,036,000162 Rating and Valuation Department ........... 45,896,000 9,286,000163 Recreation and Culture Department ........ 57,458,000 14,416,000164 Registrar General’s Department .............. 50,593,000 10,203,000166 Registry of Trade Unions ........................ 2,296,000 459,000168 Royal Observatory................................... 36,578,000 17,843,000170 Social Welfare Department ..................... 966,800,000 194,801,000172 Social Welfare Subventions .................... 300,000,000 83,250,000174 Standing Commission on Civil Service

Salaries and Conditions of Service ...... 2,546,000 521,000176 Subventions: Miscellaneous .................... 287,060,000 77,836,000178 Technical Education and Industrial

Training Department ........................... 90,291,000 19,709,000180 Television and Entertainment Licensing

Authority ............................................. 4,517,000 936,000182 Trade Industry and Customs Department . 233,280,000 55,978,000184 Transfers to Funds ................................... 13,540,126,000 13,540,126,000186 Transport Department.............................. 295,006,000 59,356,000188 Treasury................................................... 55,766,000 11,344,000


Head of Expenditure



Account$ $

190 Universities and Polytechnic ...................U 1,109,900,000 433,430,000192 Urban Services Department.....................U 298,325,000 81,803,000194 Water Supplies Department.....................W 830,026,000 170,960,000

Total......................................... 35,522,581,000 20,133,978,000

He said:―Sir, I move the third motion standing in my name on the Order Paper.

This year, as is our normal practice, the debate on the second reading of theAppropriation Bill will be extended into April to give Members time to examine the DraftEstimates for 1982-83. Thus the enactment of the Appropriation Ordinance will not takeplace before the first day of April. The purpose of this motion is to seek funds on account,to enable the Government to carry on existing services between the start of the financialyear on 1 April 1982 and the enactment of the Appropriation Ordinance. The funds onaccount sought under each head have been determined in accordance with rules which havebeen agreed by the Finance Committee of this Council.

Expenditure will be regulated in accordance with the heads and subheads shown in theDraft Estimates for 1982-83. A Vote on Account Warrant will be issued to the Director ofAccounting Services authorizing him to make payments up to the amount specified in thismotion, and will limit the expenditure in accordance with the agreed rules. The provisionunder the Vote on Account will be subsumed upon the enactment of the AppropriationOrdinance, and the General Warrant issued after the enactment of the AppropriationOrdinance will replace the Vote on Account Warrant and be effective from 1 April 1982.

Sir, I beg to move.


TEMPORARY RESTRICTION OF BUILDING DEVELOPMENT (MIDLEVELS)ORDINANCE

THE SECRETARY FOR LANDS AND WORKS moved the following motion:―Pursuant tosection 6 of the Temporary Restriction of Building Development


(Mid-levels) Ordinance, that the said Ordinance shall continue in force for a period of 4months ending on 31 July 1982.

He said:―Sir, I rise to move the resolution standing in my name on the Order Paper, whichhas the effect of extending the statutory restriction on building development in the Mid-levels area until 31 July 1982.

The Temporary Restriction of Building Development (Mid-levels) Ordinance wasenacted in May 1979 to enable a detailed geotechnical survey of the hillside slopes in thearea to be completed. The Ordinance was originally due to expire on 31 December 1981unless extended by resolution of this Council. On 9 December 1981 this Council passed aresolution extending the Ordinance for three months until 31 March 1982. The purpose ofthe extension was to enable amendments to the Buildings Ordinance and Regulations to beintroduced so that the Buildings Ordinance Office would be able to exercise appropriategeotechnical control on new building works in the Mid-levels.

At the time, Sir, it was hoped that it would prove possible to introduce the amendingBill in time for it and amending Regulations to come into force by the end of March. But itis now clear that more time is needed to complete the legislative drafting process and toenable the draft legislation to be adequately considered by the Government before beingintroduced into this Council. A further four months extension of the statutory restriction onnew building in the Mid-levels is therefore proposed.

Sir, I beg to move.


SMALL CLAIMS TRIBUNAL ORDINANCE

THE LAW DRAFTSMAN moved the following motion:―That the Schedule to the SmallClaims Tribunal Ordinance be amended―(a) in paragraph 1, by deleting ‘$3,000’ and substituting the following―‘$5,000’; and(b) in paragraph 2(b), by deleting ‘$3,000’ and substituting the following―‘$5,000’.

He said:―Sir, I move the motion standing in my name on the Order Paper.

About 2½ months ago, Sir, on 23 December, this Council passed the Administration ofJustice (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill. One of the objects of that Bill was to increasethe monetary jurisdiction of the Small Claims Tribunal from $3,000 to $5,000. The Bill,however, dealt only with the body of the Small Claims Tribunal Ordinance, and regrettablythe opportunity to amend the Schedule to that Ordinance was overlooked.


The Resolution that is the subject of this motion now seeks to amend that Schedule byreplacing two references to $3,000 with references to $5,000. Since this merely completesthe increase of monetary jurisdiction approved by this Council less than three months ago, Iwill not again inflict upon Members what I said then. I will merely confine myself toapologizing for failing on that occasion to dispose of the entire matter in one fell swoop.

Sir, I beg to move.


First reading of bills

ROADS (WORKS, USE AND COMPENSATION) BILL 1982

MISCELLANEOUS LICENCES (AMENDMENT) (NO. 2) BILL 1982

KOWLOON-CANTON RAILWAY BILL 1982

BOILERS AND PRESSURE RECEIVERS (AMENDMENT) BILL 1982

Bills read the first time and ordered to be set down for second reading pursuant to StandingOrder 41(3).

Second reading of bills

ROADS (WORKS, USE AND COMPENSATION) BILL 1982

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL moved the second reading of:―‘A bill to provide for thepublication of proposals as to works in relation to roads, objections to the proposals,authority to carry out the works and for the use of roads, powers in relation to the works onand the use of roads, compensation and connected matters’.

He said:―Sir, I move the second reading of the Roads (Works, Use and Compensation)Bill 1982.

This Bill, if enacted, will replace the Streets (Alteration) Ordinance which was passedon 8 May 1970. In the 12 years since that Ordinance was passed the complexity,sophistication and size of engineering projects in Hong Kong have increased greatly, andbuilt as they are with a view to solving or tending to solve the traffic problems here, and theneed for growth of roads in the New Territories and in the urban areas, both within themand leading to them.

The effects of these changes, and experience in its operation, have made plain that thepresent Ordinance is seriously defective in a number of ways and not


capable of adaptation by amendment to meet the present-day needs of Hong Kong. Thedefects are many. They include: uncertainty as to the meaning of some key definitions suchas ‘undertaking’ and ‘alteration’; the absence of any express power to alter a roads schemeonce gazetted, or indeed to withdraw a scheme, if necessary; the fact that the Ordinancedeals only with ‘alterations’ to existing streets, and covers neither new roads where noexisting street is affected, nor the maintenance and repair of existing streets. There isinadequate provision to inform the public of proposed new roadworks so that they mayhave their objections and views fully taken into account at an early stage. Nor are therepowers, necessary I believe in present-day circumstances, to enable the Secretary for Landsand Works to undertake preliminary site investigations or tests for geotechnical orengineering reasons at the design stage.

The claims procedure too is unsatisfactory. There is no provision allowing in genuinecases for late claims. The effect of this is that claimants are thus forced to estimate theirfinancial loss or damage long before the works have even been begun. This is a difficult notto say impossible proceeding, a not unforeseeable result of that is that every conceivableclaim is made at that stage, lest it turns out in the event that the claim is there and it hasbeen lost by not having been put forward within the time limit.

There is moreover, and this is a serious defect, considerable uncertainty and very realdebate in legal circles as to the meaning and scope of the compensation provisions. Thepresent Ordinance gives an owner or occupier a right to claim compensation where ‘anypecuniary loss or damage’ is likely to be caused to his property by proposed roadworks.This criterion for compensation in the Ordinance is, to the best of my knowledge and theresearches that have been done on my behalf, peculiar to Hong Kong. It is arguable in thedefinition what is meant by ‘damage’ and what is meant by ‘pecuniary loss’ to property. Itis arguable whether ‘pecuniary loss or damage’ is restricted to that arising from physicaldamage to property done by the construction of roadworks, or indeed whether it extends tothe existence of the roadworks, and any deleterious effects thereof on property after theircompletion, and furthermore there is argument as to whether it extends even further toinclude the deleterious effects, such as smoke, fumes, or traffic noise arising from the useof the roadworks after completion. Even if it does not extend to compensation for use assuch, it is arguable whether compensation may not be got by a side-wind by claiming fordiminution in the value of property near the roadworks arising from their presence and use.Now it is clear, I would submit to honourable Members, if a wide interpretation were to begiven to this statutory provision, claimants would have a standard of compensation higherand broader than that available to those others in the private sector who suffer similardamage or loss as a result of private building developments, as opposed to roadworks. Icannot, speaking for myself, believe that that is equitable, or that it was the intention of thisCouncil so to provide when the present Ordinance was enacted.


Even were I bold enough, Sir, to give definitive opinions on each of these legal issuestoday, the real risk remains obvious of protracted and expensive litigation taking place withappeals to the Court of Appeal and no doubt to the Privy Council thereafter. The presentuncertainty is a matter of concern, not least because the difficulty properly to quantify inadvance the total costs, including compensation, of projected roads schemes could create apressure that could inhibit the carrying out of necessary roadworks. We must remember thateven in Hong Kong the public purse is not bottomless, and that only a limited proportion ofpublic sector resources can be deployed in this area. Thus if provision has to be made inEstimates for extravagantly high compensation, then it inevitably means fewer projects canbe undertaken at any one time, and that has its consequent effects on traffic problems inHong Kong.

The object of this Bill therefore is to cure these and the other defects and to provide acomprehensive code, self-contained within one Ordinance, dealing with all matters inconnection with new roadworks of all kinds, including tunnels, as well as with thealteration, maintenance and repair of existing streetworks. It seeks to clarify the presentuncertainties relating to compensation and aims to strike a reasonable and fair balancebetween, on the one hand, the expectation, somewhat high sometimes, of the individual tobe compensated for damage or loss caused to him by streetworks, and on the other, thelegitimate interests of society as a whole in having streetworks built at not too extravagant acost.

The details of the Bill, Sir, are carefully explained in the Explanatory Memorandumand I do not intend therefore in this speech to weary Members with those detailedprovisions, but only to outline the principles of the Bill, and to mention some importantchanges from the existing procedures.

The procedure proposed in the Bill (excepting the case of minor roadworks where onlyvery limited powers are required, for instance, to close roads for a period of up to 14 daysor to close unused roads) is that the Secretary for Lands and Works must prepare a plan anddescription of the general nature of the proposed works, which is required to be depositedfor public inspection in the Land Office. Notice of the scheme is then brought to theattention of the public by notices in the Gazette, by notices in an English language and aChinese language newspaper, and perhaps more relevantly, by notices placed on site. Inaddition, the Secretary is obliged under this Bill to inform the relevant District Board of thescheme so they can interest themselves in the matter if they so wish.

After the advertisement, the public then have 60 days in which to make objections. Ifno objections are made, or if objections are made and conciliated or agreed then theSecretary may execute the scheme as gazetted. If objections are made and maintained, thenthe scheme and the objections must be considered by the Executive Council. That Councilmay either pass or decline to pass or authorize the scheme as proposed, or they mayauthorize it, imposing such conditions designed to avoid or ameliorate the effects of thescheme or of


the use of the roadworks as they think fit. For instance, I apprehend in an appropriate case,the scheme might be authorized on condition that double glazing or sound-proofing orsimilar measures were provided for those most adversely affected by either the constructionor the use of the scheme.

So far as schemes so authorized are concerned, the Secretary then is given all thenecessary powers under the Bill to implement it―for instance to resume land (if this isdone it will be on the same terms as under the Land Resumption Ordinance), to createeasements and other rights, to close roads, upon terms and after due notice has been givento enter land for the purposes of investigation, test, valuation and so on, to removeprojections or obstructions which create danger or interfere with the proposed roadworks,and there are other powers outlined in the Bill I need not detail here.

There are two new provisions I should specifically mention. First, clause 23 providesthat where land is resumed or other private rights are interfered with, and the land soresumed is reasonably necessary for the enjoyment of contiguous land, then the owner ofthe contiguous land may call upon the Government to resume that contiguous land, and, if itis fair and equitable that it should be so resumed, that is, if the removal of the other land orof the rights inhibits very seriously the enjoyment of the contiguous land, then theGovernment is bound to resume that contiguous land. In case of dispute, the Lands Tribunalis given the power of adjudication.

Second, by clause 22, where proposed building development is permanentlyincompatible, in whole or part, with planned roadworks, the Building Authority may, inorder to avoid such incompatability, refuse approval of the plan or consent to thecommencement of building works, withdraw any approval given or require the amendmentof any plan. Unless the Building Authority reviews and changes his decision after theGovernor in Council has considered the proposed roadworks, the owner may requireGovernment to resume the land, the subject of the incompatible proposed buildingdevelopment. Thus the choice is with the owner either to proceed with his development asamended by the order of the Building Authority, or alternatively to call upon Governmentto resume that land. In the case of temporary incompatibility which is expected to be rarebut could potentially arise perhaps in the case such as tunnelling where until the tunnel wasbuilt it might be undesirable to have piling work, say, going on in the neighbourhood―insuch cases, the owner may require the Government to resume his land unless, onapplication made not less than two years after the imposition of the condition requiringpostponement, the Building Authority grants approval and consent to commence buildingdevelopment within 12 months. The effect of that is, where temporary incompatibilityarises, the loss of that is thrown upon the owner for the period of two years but, if it is to belonger than that, then he has the power calling upon the Government to resume.


Lastly I must mention the approach adopted to the question of compensation. TheWorking Party who helped to produce this Bill attempted to achieve a fair balance betweentwo competing interests: first, the interests of persons affected by roadworks, as opposed tothe interests to the general public who, we should remember, at the end of the day are thepeople who foot the compensation bill. They also sought to replace the present uncertaintyby clear and definite provisions. The compensation provisions are set out in detail in PartsIII and IV and in the Schedule to the Bill.

The Bill provides that compensation for roadworks is payable only to the extentprovided for, and in the manner to be assessed, specified in the Schedule. In the printedversion of my speech the ten of the principal grounds of compensation (see APPENDIX)are there detailed for those serious students or those with an interest to read them. Suffice itto say that compensation is payable for physical damage of all sorts, and is payable forfinancial loss allied thereto.

Compensation is not payable for any matter not specified in the Schedule. Thus nocompensation is payable in respect of noise, dust, vibration, loss of view, loss of amenity,or diminution in value arising from the carrying out of the roadworks or from the existenceand use of the roadworks after completion. This, as I have previously explained, seems afair provision because it accords with the legal position so far as similar claims againstprivate contractors and private developers are concerned in respect of the construction ofbuildings in Hong Kong.

The Bill sets out a detailed procedure for compensation claims. The Lands Tribunal isgiven jurisdiction to hear and determine all disputed claims, and also power in appropriatecases to extend the time-limits for claiming.

One difficult problem which it was necessary to resolve is which legislation, theexisting Ordinance or the Bill, should apply to roadworks which are at the planning stageand have not yet been commenced. The Government concluded that the fairest and mostpracticable break-point arose after gazetting and authorization by the Governor in Councilof roadworks under section 6 of the existing Ordinance. Accordingly, under the Bill, in thecase of roadworks already gazetted and authorized, then the existing Ordinance will apply,but in the case of all other roadworks, the Bill will apply.

Sir, it is intended, as this is a somewhat complicated and lengthy measure, that thesecond reading debate on this Bill should be adjourned for approximately two months toallow full opportunity for representations to be made by the public―and I would invitethem to do that―and to permit also a detailed examination of the Bill by Members of thisCouncil to take place.

Sir, I move that the debate on this motion be now adjourned.


APPENDIX

The Schedule provides that compensation shall be paid in respect of―(1) the resumption of land;(2) physical or structural damage to any land or building, together with loss resulting

therefrom;(3) the creation of easements or other permanent rights, or rights of temporary occupation,

together with loss resulting from such creation;(4) the extinction of any easement and loss resulting from such extinction;(5) the closure, or extinction, modification or restriction of a private right in respect of a

road where access to land is adversely affected;(6) the extinction, modification or restriction of any private right over Crown foreshore or

sea-bed;(7) loss resulting from such extinctions, modifications or restrictions;(8) physical or structural damage resulting from exercise of the power of inspection and

the carrying out of preventive and remedial works, together with loss from suchdamage;

(9) the removal of any authorized structure or the expense incurred in reinstating orreplacing the same; and

(10) any amendment required or condition imposed to avoid incompatibility.

Motion made. That the debate on the second reading of the Bill be adjourned―THEATTORNEY GENERAL.



THE SECRETARY FOR HOME AFFAIRS moved the second reading of:―‘A bill to amend theMiscellaneous Licences Ordinance.’

He said:―Sir, I move that the Miscellaneous Licences (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill 1982 beread the second time.

This Bill is intended to block another loophole in the principal Ordinance which hascome to light since the last amendment enacted in January this year. It concerns videomachines which have been deliberately adjusted so as not to register any score. Theemergence of these machines had not been foreseen because a great part of the enjoymentof the skilled players is achieving a very high score. However, as about 100 establishmentshave sprung up with these machines there clearly is sufficiently consumer interest for themto be taken seriously.

When I answered a question in this Council on 20 January, I said that the LegalDepartment was considering whether these scoreless machines were


covered by the present Ordinance. We have since received legal advice that some of thesemachines which still have reference to a score on their computer programmes, although notactually displaying the score, are arguably covered by the present Ordinance. However it isvery easy to reprogramme the circuits to circumvent this and in some machines this mayhave been done already. We conclude therefore that the best course of action would be tointroduce a definition of establishments requiring licensing which would unarguably coverthese machines. This is what the Bill seeks to achieve. Because of the wider definition, theestablishments are now more appropriately called ‘amusement game centres’.

Video or amusement games are found in an area of rapid technological development.To provide for legislative flexibility in dealing with future innovations, a schedule isincluded in the definition of ‘amusement game centres’ in this Bill, to allow for theconclusion of any new machines by order of Governor in Council. Should yet moreloopholes be found they can be stopped very quickly. Another schedule allows forexemption of machines or premises from licence requirements, for instance, strength-testing machines commonly seen in fun fairs, and temporary exemption can be provided onapplication for a fund-raising party using video game machines for charitable purposes.

Recent experience with unlicensed operators, with their cavalier attitude towards thelaw, has called for strong sanctions that would force them either to close or to operate inacceptable regulated circumstances. To this end, the Bill provides for the fine for operatingunlicensed establishments to be increased from $1,000 to $50,000, and more important, forthe mandatory forfeiture of machines found in unlicensed centres. This latter provision hasbeen found necessary to deal with cases where a front man is the person convicted but theexpensive machines are then returned to their owner for redeployment.

There is no excuse for intending operators not to apply for a proper licence. The timetaken by the Commissioner for Television and Entertainment Licensing to process licenceapplications has now been reduced considerably. When I spoke in this Council on 6 January,I said that new applications for licences could be dealt with within two months. In fact, theCommissioner has now advised me that all 1 372 licence applications received up to 9February, that is, just one month ago―have been dealt with. This is less than half the time Ipromised in January. This is due to the additional staff and their hard work in the LicensingAuthority and the departments concerned, particularly the Police.

In view of the strong public feeling several Unofficial Members have said the Billshould be taken through all three readings in one day. This Bill certainly is urgently neededto plug a loophole. Since it does not involve any new policy, I have proposed that all threereadings of this Bill should be taken in this session to-day.

Once the Bill is passed, immediate Police action will be taken against unlicensedcentres.


Sir, I beg to move.

MR. ALLEN LEE:―Sir, I rise in support of the Miscellaneous Licences (Amendment) (No. 2)Bill 1982.

I welcome the speed with which this Bill has been prepared and introduced into thisCouncil. Since the enactment of the Miscellaneous Licences (Amendment) Ordinance 1982passed by this Council on the 6 January, unscrupulous operator have sought to evade theprovisions of the law by erasing scores from their video game machines. The readiness ofthese individuals to search out loopholes in the legislation is all the more reprehensiblewhen one considers that Government, by seeking to licence all amusement game centresdoes not intend to ban such establishments but merely to ensure that certain reasonableoperation requirements are met.

I am glad to note that new definition proposed in this Bill unequivocally covers allexisting video games and that additionally it enables the Government to respond quickly toany further modifications by unscrupulous operators trying to circumvent the law. Thepowers of seizure and forfeiture granted to the Police and the Courts are also greatlystrengthened. This will provide a significant deterrent to those who persist in illegaloperations in the pursuit of quick profit.

I understand that the existing illegal video game establishments are highly profitable.The extent of such profit is attributable to the willingness of such individuals tocompromise the safety and well-being of members of our community, especially the veryyoung. We must stop these illegal operations as soon as we can. I therefore wholeheartedlysupport the rather unusual procedure of having this Bill read three times in one sitting.

With these words, Sir, I support the Bill.

MR. SO delivered his speech in Cantonese:―

督憲閣㆘：本㆟支持㆒九八㆓年雜類牌照（修訂）（第㆓號）法案。

自從主要法例於本年㆒月六日修訂以來，仍有㆒小撮頑固商㆟挖空心思，將電子遊戲機改裝，不顯示分數，或以「試機」等藉口，明目張膽或半公開式的繼續經營，藉以逃避發牌管制。該等游戲機㆗心質素低劣，不特漠視法紀，而且忽視公眾安全及公共利益。

政府今日建議立即修改法例，除加重罰款及充公機器外，更將「自動遊戲機㆗心」的定義，改為含義更廣、更切實際的「娛樂遊戲㆗心」，用以包括任何型式的自動或電視遊戲機，以堵塞漏洞。政府維護立法及執法精神與尊嚴，所表現的決心和努力，本㆟非常讚揚；相信社會㆟士亦有同感。

本㆟認為該法案只針對存心不軌或不法商㆟，對於遵守法例的商㆟或申請㆟，應絕無影響。

本㆟亦趁此機會，重申幾位非官守議員在本年㆒月六日立法局會議席㆖提出的要求：政府應全力從速處理有關的牌照申請。

督憲閣㆘，本㆟謹此陳辭，支持當前動議。

(The following is the interpretation of what Mr. SO said.)


Sir, I rise to support the Miscellaneous Licences (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill 1982.

A handful of obstinate operators of video game centres have been continuing with theiroperation brazenly or semi-overtly since the principal Ordinance was amended on 6 January.In order to evade the licensing control they racked their brains to modify their video gamemachines or delete the scoreline, or operate on the pretext of ‘machine testing’, etc. Suchautomatic machine centres are poorly equipped. They not only defy the law but also ignorethe safety and interests of the public.

Today the Government proposes to amend the legislation with immediate effect. TheBill seeks to plug the loopholes by providing for the imposition of heavier fines,confiscation of machines as well as the substitution of the definition of ‘automatic machinecentre’ with the more comprehensive and appropriate one of ‘amusement game centre’ tocover all types of automatic or video game machines. The resolution and efforts asdemonstrated by the Government to uphold the spirit and dignity of law enactment andenforcement is indeed laudable. I believe other members of society will feel the same.

In my opinion, this Bill only aims at those unscrupulous or illegal operators and willhave absolutely no ill effects on law-abiding businessmen or applicants.

Sir, I would also like to take this opportunity to reiterate the request made by some ofmy Unofficial Colleagues in this Council on 6 January, that is, the Government shouldprocess the applications for such licences as quickly as possible.

With these remarks, Sir, I support the motion.

MR. CHAN KAM-CHUEN:―Sir, I rise to support the Miscellaneous Licences (Amendment)(No. 2) Bill 1982.

In my last speech on 6 Janaury this year, I mentioned that video game centres shouldbe controlled and that it was too early to draw any conclusion on whether they were centresof criminal activities. The recent bloodshed in one of these establishments within such ashort time of operation serves as a clear and stern warning to the public that they shouldstrongly support stringent control of such centres for the good of their younger generation.

‘Videomania’, if not nipped in the bud, would make a child become addicted, put hislunch allowance into the machines, even drop out of school and refuse to communicate withfriends and parents. In the extreme cases, this could well result in the child pinching moneyfrom home, or playing into the hands of loan sharks and drug traffickers to satisfy his gameaddition. When children are exposed to criminal elements, it is but a short cut tocorrectional institutes.

Governments in some countries simply prohibit the import of video game machines,but Hong Kong being a free port such draconian measures are not taken here. Instead, wetry to regulate and endeavour to make these centres


respectable. However, operators must not take tolerance as weakness. Recent eventsindicated that some do not accept the spirit of the legislation but choose to play around withwords and thought that they would outwit the law.

Sir, this leads to a much more serious and fundamental issue, i.e., the undermining ofour legal system and open defiance to Government authority. The stability and prosperity ofour community rest on the solid foundation of law and order and we cannot and must notallow any unscrupulous operators to rock it.

Chinese historians once described a weak government as ‘政令不出都門 ’ i.e.administrative instructions were not obeyed beyond the gates of its capital. We musttherefore ensure that legislation is not just made within these four walls, but that it is trulyenforceable throughout the whole territory. On this rests the confidence and respect of thepublic to law. There will also be a feeling of fair treatment by law-abiding operators whohave fulfilled the licensing conditions and those applicants now patiently awaiting theirlicence. I believe this Bill, which provides for a more flexible definition of ‘amusementgame centres’ and for stiffer penalties, will deter those who think evasion would pay.

With these observations, Sir, I strongly support that this Bill be passed in one sittingand that swift and sharp follow-up action be taken to rectify the situation.

SECRETARY FOR HOME AFFAIRS:―I am most grateful to honourable Members for theirsupport for this Bill and for the proposal that the Bill pass through all its stages thisafternoon.

As Mr. LEE and Mr. CHAN say the Government policy is not one of suppression but ofreasonable regulation.

Mr. Andrew SO reminds us that applications for licences should be processed quickly.A special effort has been made to clear the back-log by extra staff posted for a short period.I mentioned 1372 applications were received between 1 June 1981 and 9 February 1982.141 licences have been issued, 480 licences have been approved subject to the applicantscomplying with requirements for modifications of their premises, 260 applications havebeen rejected and 491 applications have been withdrawn. In the last month another 87applications have been received. Processing of 15 of this has been completed. None of theoutstanding applications has been in our hands for more than a month.

Mr. CHAN mentioned a fight which broke out in a video games centre on Sundaymorning. This was at 4.00 a.m. in an unlicensed centre which is open twenty-four hours aday, is over crowded and just the sort of place I hope will now be closed down.

I can readily understand Mr. CHAN’s fear that if the Government failed to take actionin the face of this blatant evasion of the law it could give the


impression that it was a government of 政令不出都門 If however honourable Memberswill support this Bill I feel sure that everyone will recognize that in Hong Kong 政令貫徹

始終﹒


Bill read the second time.

Bill committed to a committee of the whole Council pursuant to Standing Order 43(1).

KOWLOON-CANTON RAILWAY BILL 1982

THE SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT moved the second reading of:―‘A bill to repeal andreplace the Kowloon-Canton Railway Ordinance; to provide for the continuedadministration of Kowloon-Canton Railway and for connected purposes.’

He said:―Sir, I move the second reading of the Kowloon-Canton Railway Bill 1982.

The Bill seeks to repeal the existing Kowloon-Canton Railway Ordinance (Chapter 99)and to replace it with legislation more up-to-date in wording, more logical in presentationand easier to administer. The old Bill, like the old railway, has given good and long service,but must now be superseded.

The principal changes proposed by the Bill include that certain powers, formerlyexercised by or with the authority of Governor in Council, will become the province of theGovernor, in accordance with present practice. Clauses 4, 5(2), 8, 12, 14 and 31(4) areconcerned.

Clauses 31(3) provides for an appeal by a railway employee against not only thepunishment, but also the findings, in a disciplinary hearing by the General Manager,Railway.

The necessary subsidiary regulations for the introduction of the electrified servicewould be made under the new legislation, by the General Manager of the Railway subject toapproval by the Governor in Council.

Members may wish to know of some significant amendments necessary in the newdraft regulations.

First, regulations on ticketing to provide for the use of an automatic revenue collectionsystem. Magnetic encoded tickets will be sold to passengers at stations byautomatic vending machines. Passengers will enter and leave the paid areas ofstations by inserting tickets into automatic barriers. Members of the Council areno doubt familiar with this system from travelling on the Mass Transit Railway.


Second, a regulation designed to prevent abuse of the emergency brake installed ineach set of the electric multiple units (in plain English, in each carriage of a train).These emergency brakes are, naturally, and must be easily accessible topassengers and they are, of course, a temptation. The regulation provides for apenalty of up to $1,000 for improper use.

Third, regulations to make it an offence to interfere with or damage any railwayproperty including overhead wiring, fences, signals, electrical equipment andinstallations, and so on. Substantial penalties will be provided for these offences.

Fourth, a regulation making it an offence to fly kites, balloons, or model aircraft in theair above the railway, as this could interfere with, or cause damage to, overheadwires and electrical equipment.

Sir, I move that debate on this motion be now adjourned.

Motion made. That the debate on the second reading of the Bill be adjourned―THESECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT.


BOILERS AND PRESSURE RECEIVERS (AMENDMENT) BILL 1982

THE COMMISSIONER FOR LABOUR moved the second reading of:―‘A bill to amend theBoilers and Pressure Receivers Ordinance.’

He said:―Sir, I rise to move the second reading of the Boilers and Pressure Receivers(Amendment) Bill 1982.

In the amendment Bill, it is proposed that sections 4, 8, 64 and 66 should be amendedin order to include reference to the new post of surveyor. A number of other new posts havebeen created in recent years. It is, therefore, proposed to amend section 2 of the Ordinanceso that the definitions will, where applicable, include the new posts.

The fines prescribed in Part VII of the Ordinance were fixed in 1963. They are out-of-date now and are insufficient to act as a serious deterrent. In recommending the levels ofthe revised penalties, I have taken into account the seriousness of the offences and whetherthe offence was committed by persons other than the owner in a similar way to fine levelsrecently reviewed for all safety regulations under the Factories and Industrial UndertakingsOrdinance. The same criteria will also be followed when I make consequential proposals torevise penalties under the Boilers and Pressure Receivers Regulations.

Sir, I move that the debate on this motion be now adjourned.


Motion made. That the debate on the second reading of the Bill be adjourned―THECOMMISSIONER FOR LABOUR.


BANKING (AMENDMENT) BILL 1982

Resumption of debate on second reading (10 February 1982)

Question proposed.




DEPOSIT-TAKING COMPANIES (AMENDMENT) BILL 1982


Question proposed.




ARBITRATION (AMENDMENT) BILL 1982


Question proposed.

MR. PETER C. WONG:―Sir, the purpose of the Bill is to amend the Arbitration Ordinance togive effect to recommendations of the Law Reform Commission.

The Report of the Commission on Commercial Arbitration is extremely well presentedand represents a comprehensive study on the subject in the context of


Hong Kong. A number of important topics are now under study by the Commission andjudging from this first report, I would venture to say that the work of the Commission willbe of immense value in our quest for a fair and equitable system of law tailored for theneeds of Hong Kong.

As pointed out by the Attorney General, there is a need in the Asian and Pacific regionfor an acceptable centre for holding international arbitration. The proposed amendments aredesigned to help Hong Kong to meet this regional demand and to improve the existing legalframework governing local arbitration.

The Legislation Scrutiny Group of the Unofficial Members of this Council hasexamined the Bill and has held discussions with the Attorney General and three seniorofficers of his department. After careful deliberation, the Group is generally satisfied withthe provisions of the Bill.

The Attorney General will propose an amendment to clause 2A(1). He will no doubtexplain the reason for the amendment, and I need only say the Group supports his proposal.

If this Bill is passed into law, it will provide a satisfactory legal framework for local aswell as international arbitration. But much remains to be done. Rules for the conduct ofarbitration in Hong Kong will have to be drafted, and this will require the same degree ofcare, expertise and consultation as the drafting of the Bill itself. At a time when things aremoving very quickly, it would be wise to proceed as swiftly as it practicable with thepreparation of the necessary subsidiary legislation.

There is also the need to provide suitable arbitration facilities. This is an area whereprivate institutions concerned with arbitration would no doubt wish to play an active role.Similarly, the shortage of arbitrators in Hong Kong will be another area where theseinstitutions would wish to consider and seek ways and means to improve the situation.Government should play a co-ordinating role, and should stimulate and assist in thedevelopment of Hong Kong as a centre for international arbitration.

I share the Attorney General’s confidence that we will succeed in attaining ourobjective, and, if I may add, the Hong Kong way.

Sir, I support the motion.

MR. F. K. HU:―Sir, it is indeed a record achievement that the third reading on Arbitration(Amendment) Bill 1982 is taking place today, only four months after the Report onCommercial Arbitration was submitted by the Law Reform Commission in December 1981.This Bill will set a modern legal framework in preparation for the private sector to establishan international arbitration centre in Hong Kong to serve local and international parties inthis region.

Arbitrations have been conducted in Hong Kong in the past. In the last three years,1978-1980, the estimated average number of arbitrations carried out in


Hong Kong is twenty per annum, involving a variety of subject matters such as maritime,insurance, construction and sale of goods.

Hong Kong already has the potential to develop into an international arbitration centrein this region. In the 1980 Bermuda Conference jointly organized by the Chartered Instituteof Arbitrators, the American Arbitration Association and the Arbitrators’ Institute ofCanada, the U.S. delegate suggested that an arbitration centre in addition to London andNew York was needed and two places were mentioned, Hong Kong or Bermuda. HongKong was considered because of its status in international trade and commerce.

After this Bill is enacted, serious discussions with various institutions, such as ShipOwners’ Association, Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce, Chinese Manufacturers’Association, the Hong Kong Branch of the Institute of Arbitrators etc. should be held on theways and means of making Hong Kong an arbitration centre, with the assistance andsupport from the Government to provide the necessary arbitration facilities. Rules ofarbitration will have to be drafted. The Government can further assist in publicizing andpromoting arbitration in Hong Kong. It can also help greatly in the field of education andtraining.

The availability of international arbitration services will, I am sure, further enhance theposition of Hong Kong as a leading finance and commercial centre.

Sir, with these remarks, I have the pleasure to support the motion.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL:―Sir, I would like first to thank the Legislative Scrutiny Group,in particular, thank Mr. Peter C. WONG and Mr. HU for the care with which they looked atthe Bill and for the kind words they have just said. I am most grateful for the confirmationthat the Bill as drafted appears in good shape and that there is perhaps only one change thatmight be made to it. The fact that the Bill is in such good shape conveys a great deal ofcredit on Mr. Andrew LI who, in many ways, was the originator by the hard work he’s putin, of it.

Sir, the change which I shall later be proposing is in clause 2 to the Bill which altersclause 2A of the Bill. Under that clause as drafted, power was given to the court on a jointapplication by both parties in an arbitration agreement where there was a conciliation clauseseeking the appointment of a conciliator, a part of the court, on a joint application, to makethat appointment where the appointer was in default in so doing.

The Legislative Scrutiny Group pointed out that bearing in mind the importance ofconciliation or mediation in Hong Kong and in neighbouring countries, it would be wise toalter that clause by allowing an application by either party to the court. So that the court, ifone party applied, could then appoint a conciliator. The thinking behind that is thatalthough it might be that the other party initially is not minded to be conciliated or mediated,nevertheless


when his uncle got hold of him, perhaps he would change his views. So therefore, thealteration which I shall propose at a later stage seeks to achieve that object.




POLICE FORCE (AMENDMENT) BILL 1982


Question proposed.

MR. LO:―Sir, in May 1980 the U.M.E.L.C.O. Police Group under its previous chairman,Sir Sydney GORDON, recommended to Your Excellency amongst other things that a meansshould be provided for enforcing the retirement of officers adjudged manifestly unfit toserve in the Force.

If, after the passage of this Bill, the necessary amendments are made to the appropriateDiscipline Regulations, it would be true to say that from a practical viewpoint means havebeen found to enforce the retirement of Inspectors and junior ranks adjudged manifestlyunfit. This leaves the position of gazetted officers unchanged and somewhat unsatisfactoryfor reasons not directly relevant to these proposals.

Since this Bill is certainly a step in the right direction, it has my full support.

SECRETARY FOR SECURITY:―I am grateful to Mr. T. S. LO for his full support.

He has hinted that the Bill leaves the position of gazetted officers in some waysunchanged and in others, unsatisfactory. May be my attempts to achieve brevity in movingthe second reading have led him to that conclusion.

I should perhaps make clear that, as provided under section 13 of the Police ForceOrdinance, gazetted officers of the Royal Hong Kong Police Force are subject to ColonialRegulations. These regulations already provide both for the compulsory retirement of agazetted officer following specific acts of misconduct and, where the public interest sorequires, for the retirement of a gazetted officer without the necessity for a formaldisciplinary hearing.





APPRENTICESHIP (AMENDMENT) BILL 1982


Question proposed.

MR. S. L. CHEN:―Sir, in moving the second reading of the Apprenticeship (Amendment)Bill 1982, the Secretary for Education touched on three clauses of the Bill only, namely, 6,8 and 9. Some of the other clauses in my opinion require clarification and I referparticularly to clauses 10 and 11.

Section 47(1) of the principal Ordinance empowers the Commissioner for Labour tomake regulations. Clause 10 amends this to enable the Director of Technical Education andIndustrial Training to make regulations ‘with the approval of the Commissioner’.

As there is already a provision in the principal Ordinance, section 47(3) whereby allregulations have to be approved by this Council, I have considerable doubts in the wisdomof using the phrase ‘with the approval of’ as it may unnecessarily tie the hands, as it were,of the Director. I suggest therefore that it would be more appropriate to replace the words‘with the approval of’ by ‘in consultation with’ in clause 10.

Speaking as an employer of apprentices in designated trades, I am somewhatconcerned about the practical effects that the proposed amendments will have on suchemployers. Up till now, employers have only the Commissioner for Labour to deal with.But with the proposed transfer of authority from the Commissioner to the Director for someof the provisions and the retention of the Commissioner as the authority for the others,notably regulations 8, 9, 10 and 11, will it mean, therefore, that in future employers have todeal with more than one authority and possibly be visited by inspectors of both departmentsin respect of every registered apprentice? If this is the case, I am afraid that the additionalred tape would, in my opinion, deter employers from taking on young people for training. Iwould therefore like to have an assurance from Government that this is not its intention andthat such a situation will not arise in future.

Sir, with these observations, I support the motion before Council.

SECRETARY FOR EDUCATION:―Sir, Mr. CHEN has asked for some clarification of clauses 10and 11 of the Bill.


It is true that clause 10 will amend section 47 of the main Ordinance so thatRegulations in future would be made by the Director of Technical Educaton and IndustrialTraining with the approval of the Commissioner for Labour. Some of the regulations dealwith matters which should remain within the general responsibilities of the Commissionerfor Labour, like the conditions of employment such as hours of work, the payment of wages,etc. In order to avoid duplication of powers within the section, especially in view of thewideranging powers in section 47(1)(i), I think it is correct that all the regulations should bemade by the Director with the approval of the Commissioner. This appears to tie the handsof the Director but this is better than not tying his hands at all in the sort of cases to which Ihave referred. Mr. CHEN’s suggestion that words ‘with the approval of’ should be replacedby words ‘in consultation with’ would not require the Director to follow theCommissioner’s advice over these matters and as I have said I believe this would be wrong.I feel that the wording of this clause is best left as shown in the Bill.

Regarding Mr. CHEN’s second point, I can assure him that the retention of theCommissioner for Labour as the authority for regulations 8, 9, 10 and 11 will not meanadditional work for employers, nor will employers, in the ordinary course of events, bevisited by inspectors of two department in respect of registered apprentices. TheCommissioner has indicated that he will delegate under section 5 of the principal Ordinance,his powers under regulations 8, 9, 10 and 11 to inspectors as defined in section 33 of theprincipal Ordinance and other public officers of the new department as appropriate. TheCommissioner however remains the Authority for these regulations and will monitor eventsthrough regular report from the new department.

Sir, I move that the Apprenticeship (Amendment) Bill be read a second time.




LEGAL AID (AMENDMENT) BILL 1982


Question proposed.





HOUSING (AMENDMENT) BILL 1982


Question proposed.

MR. CHARLES YEUNG:―Sir, the Housing Authority established under section 3 of theHousing Ordinance is veritably an autonomous authority in policy making as well as inpolicy execution, through the Housing Department, on matters relating to the building andmanagement of public housing, control and clearance of Crown Land, resettlement ofsquatters and displaced inhabitants.

As the public housing programme originated in the urban area and since historically ithas been linked with the Urban Council, it is understandable that the majority of theunofficial members of the Housing Authority have been drawn from the Urban Councilmembership.

The shift in the emphasis of the public housing programme to the New Territories ingeneral, and to the new towns in particular, sweeps along with it the concomitant social andpolitical problems of land resumption, clearance, compensation and resettlement. It istherefore appropriate and felicitous to enlist the people who have profound knowledge andconnections in the New Territories to serve on the Housing Authority. The proposal in theBill to remove the restriction both in number and source of membership on the appointmentof unofficial members to the Housing Authority is timely and opportune, albeit the UrbanCouncillors who have served or are serving on the Authority have made an outstanding andvaluable contribution in providing quality housing for so many in so short a time,particularly against a scarcity of land resource and a number of other constraints.

The proposal in the Bill to improve controls over the Home Ownership Scheme and thePrivate Sector Participation Scheme is a necessary means to ensure that flats go to thegenuine home-seekers. For the sake of fairness to those who are less fortunate, no effortshould be spared in future in detecting any breach of conditions and in enforcing thesanctions created by law with a vigilant eye on abuse and circumvention.

With these remarks, Sir, it is my pleasure to support the motion now before Council.

SECRETARY FOR HOUSING:―Sir, I am grateful to Mr. YEUNG for his support of the mainprovisions of this new legislation.


Since I last spoke on the Bill the New Territories District Board elections have takenplace, and in September those for membership of the urban area boards will be held.

The public’s enthusiastic response to the elections last Thursday is a most encouragingdevelopment and indeed confirms that we are on the right path in making provision forwider representation on the Housing Authority in the future.




Committee stage of bills

Council went into Committee.

BANKING (AMENDMENT) BILL 1982

Clause 1 was agreed to.

Clause 2

THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY:―Sir, I move that clause 2(a) be amended as set out in thepaper circulated to Members.

This amendment is required to correct an anomaly in the proposed definition of a‘local representative office’. That definition, as presently drafted, would include thebranches in Hong Kong of certain banks incorporated outside Hong Kong which areregistered or licensed under the Deposit-taking Companies Ordinance. This is an unusualsituation which exists only because these institutions do not have the word bank in theirtitle, though they are recognized and supervised as banks in their countries of origin.

It is clearly appropriate that their activities in Hong Kong, which include the businessof taking deposits, should be regulated and supervised under the Deposit-taking CompaniesOrdinance, rather than under the new sections of the Banking Ordinance coveringrepresentative offices. This amendment will therefore prevent any argument as to which ofthe two Ordinance applies to these deposit-taking companies.

Proposed amendment


Clause 2

That clause 2(a) be amended by deleting the definition of ‘local representative office’and substituting the following definition―

‘local representative office’ means an office in Hong Kong of a bank incorporatedoutside Hong Kong which is not―(a) licensed under section 7;(b) a deposit-taking company; and(c) recognized as the central bank of the country or place in which it is

incorporated;’.

The amendment was agreed to.

Clause 2, as amended, was agreed to.

Clauses 3 to 13 were agreed to.

The Schedule was agreed to.

DEPOSIT-TAKING COMPANIES (AMENDMENT) BILL 1982


New clause 2A. ‘Amendment of section 8’.

Clause read the first time and ordered to be set down for second reading pursuant toStanding Order 46(6).

THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY:―Sir, in accordance with Standing Order 46(6), I move thatnew clause 2A as set out in the paper circulated to Members be read a second time.

This clause is intended to correct an inadvertent side-effect of the amendment, inclause 17, to the First Schedule to the Ordinance. It has been suggested by the Hong KongDeposit-taking Companies Association that this amendment, taken together with section8(2)(a) of the Ordinance, could prevent a deposit- taking company from obtaining a smalloverdraft or other advance from a bank outside Hong Kong in a currency other than theHong Kong dollar. That, Sir, would not be a desirable result.

New clause 2A therefore amends section 8(2)(a) of the Ordinance, with consequentialamendments to other sections. The result will be that a deposit- taking company can take adeposit (which by definition includes an overdraft) of any size, in any currency, and of anymaturity, from a bank, whether or not that bank is licensed under the Banking Ordinance.Normal international money market operations will therefore be able to continueunhindered.



Clause read the second time.

THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY:―I move that new clause 2A be added to the Bill.

Proposed addition

New clause 2A

That a new clause be added after clause 2 as follows―

‘Amendmentof Section 8.

2A. Section 8 of the principal Ordinance is amended, insubsections (2)(a), (3) and (5), by deleting "licensed".’.

The addition of the new clause was agreed to.First and Second Schedules were agreed to.

ARBITRATION (AMENDMENT) BILL 1982


Clause 2

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL:―I move that clause 2 be amended as set out in the papercirculated to Members and for the reasons I have explained above.

Proposed amendment

Clause 2

That clause 2 be amended in the proposed new section 2A by deleting subsection (1)and substituting the following―

‘(1) In any case where an arbitration agreement provides for the appointmentof a conciliator by a person who is not one of the parties and that person refuses tomake the appointment or does not make it within the time specified in theagreement or, if no time is so specified, within a reasonable time not exceeding 2months of being informed of the existence of the dispute, any party to theagreement may serve the person in question with a written notice to appoint aconciliator (and shall forthwith serve a copy of the notice on the other parties tothe agreement) and if the appointment is not made within 7 clear days afterservice of the notice the Court or a judge thereof may, on the application of anyparty to the agreement, appoint a conciliator who shall have the like powers to actin the conciliation proceedings as if he had been appointed in accordance with theterms of the agreement.’.







POLICE FORCE (AMENDMENT) BILL 1982


APPRENTICESHIP (AMENDMENT) BILL 1982


LEGAL AID (AMENDMENT) BILL 1982


HOUSING (AMENDMENT) BILL 1982


Council then resumed.

Third reading of bills

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL reported that the

MISCELLANEOUS LICENCES (AMENDMENT) (NO. 2) BILL

POLICE FORCE (AMENDMENT) BILL

APPRENTICESHIP (AMENDMENT) BILL

LEGAL AID (AMENDMENT) BILL and


HOUSING (AMENDMENT) BILL

had passed through Committee without amendment and the

BANKING (AMENDMENT) BILL

DEPOSIT-TAKING COMPANIES (AMENDMENT) BILL and

ARBITRATION (AMENDMENT) BILL

had passed through Committee with amendments and moved the third reading of each ofthe Bills.

Question put on each Bill and agreed to.

Bills read the third time and passed.

Unofficial Member’s Bill

Second reading of bill

THE HONG KONG AND CHINA GAS COMPANY (TRANSFER OFINCORPORATION) BILL 1982


Question proposed.




Committee stage of bill

Council went into Committee.


THE HONG KONG AND CHINA GAS COMPANY (TRANSFER OFINCORPORATION) BILL 1982

Clause 1

MR. LOBO:―Sir, I move that Clause 1 be amended as set out in the paper circulated toMembers. The amendment corrects an omission in the citation of the Bill.

Proposed amendment

Clause 1

That clause 1 be amended by inserting after ‘Ordinance’, in the second place where itoccurs, the following―

‘1982’.



Clause 2.

MR. LOBO:―Sir, I move that Clause 2 be amended as set out in the paper circulated toMembers. I will set out the reason for this amendment and for the two further amendments,which I will propose this afternoon.

Under the United Kingdom Companies Act 1980, the Company is required to registerunder a new name. The purpose of the amendments is to exempt the Company for a periodof 1 year after the change of name from the requirements of the Companies Ordinance topublish its new name. When the Company’s registration is transferred to Hong Kong, itsname will revert to its existing one.

Proposed amendment

Clause 2

That clause 2 be amended in the definition of ‘the company’ by deleting ‘and named’and substituting the following―

‘and, subject to the Companies Act 1980 of the United Kingdom, named’.





Clause 4

MR. LOBO:―I move that clause 4 be amended as set out in the paper circulated toMembers.

Proposed amendment

Clause 4

That clause 4(1) be amended―(a) by deleting ‘it appears in the memorandum referred to in section 3(2)(e)’ and

substituting the following―‘ “The Hong Kong and China Gas Company Limited” ’; and

(b) by inserting after ‘reflect’ the following―‘the change in the name of the company (if any) and’.



Clause 5

MR. LOBO:―I move that clause 5 be amended as set out in the paper circulated to Membersand for the reasons I have explained before.

Proposed amendment

Clause 5

That clause 5 be amended by inserting after subclause (3) the following―‘(4) If the name of the Company is changed pursuant to the requirements of the

Companies Act 1980 of the United Kingdom before the transfer date, then until―(a) the transfer date, or(b) the first anniversary of the date of the change of name,whichever is the earlier, any provision of the Companies Ordinance or any otherOrdinance requiring or authorizing the name of the company to be shown on anydocument or other object or at any place where the company carries on businessshall apply as if any reference in that provision to the name of the company were areference to a name which either is its name or was its name before such change ofname.’.




Clauses 6 and 7 were agreed to.

Council then resumed.

Third reading of bill

MR. LOBO reported that

THE HONG KONG AND CHINA GAS COMPANY (TRANSFER OFINCORPORATION) BILL

had passed through Committee with amendments, and he moved the third reading of theBill.

Question put on the Bill and agreed to.

Bill read the third time and passed.

Adjournment and next sitting

HIS EXCELLENCY THE PRESIDENT:―In accordance with Standing Orders I now adjourn theCouncil until 2.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 24 March 1982.

Adjourned accordingly at twenty minutes past four o’clock.

Documents

HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 10 March 1982 511 · hong kong legislative council―10 march 1982 515 Organization presently is located, as a matter of administrative convenience,